Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
.pcc_sub symbols automatically get entered into the global stash.
We need to get some of this moved down into the base assembler as well.
Done.
$ perldoc /docs/pmc/sub.pod
Leopold Toetsch writes:
I don't. I don't know, what the autorun should initialize. Do you have
examples, what is/will be accomplished in the init sub.
Considering that subs have to be manually inserted into the symbol
table, perhaps the init code would add all the subs in a package to its
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ autorun of loaded byte code ]
But how to pass arguments then? Init code might need some.
What arguments, though? This is just a chance to give the segment an
initialization run, nothing more.
I
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch writes:
I don't. I don't know, what the autorun should initialize. Do you have
examples, what is/will be accomplished in the init sub.
Considering that subs have to be manually inserted
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
.pcc_sub symbols automatically get entered into the global stash. The
lexer should probably allow '::' as a valid symbol char though.
We need to get some of this moved down into the base assembler as well.
The
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hrm. That does mean that we may want two entry points for a segment, the
init point and the run point. For perl, the two are the same, but for a
language like C they'd be different. I still dislike magic names, so I'd
prefer slots in the header. (Or, if
I see we've got dynamically loaded bytecode segments. Good. What we don't
have is those segments automatically running, something I think we need to
have happen.
When a bytecode segment is loaded, control should pass to the first
executable instruction in it, and proceed until it hits an end.
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see we've got dynamically loaded bytecode segments. Good. What we don't
have is those segments automatically running, something I think we need to
have happen.
When a bytecode segment is loaded, control should pass to the first
executable instruction
At 11:13 PM +0200 9/23/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see we've got dynamically loaded bytecode segments. Good. What we don't
have is those segments automatically running, something I think we need to
have happen.
When a bytecode segment is loaded, control
