On Thu Feb 14 16:49:17 EST 2013, [email protected] wrote: > No, but the value at least isn't bizarre. It would be correct for rloge as > an array, and i assume it gets through because of the way the > array->pointer change is done. Even so, if it had been GCC, by now it would > be an essential extension, and have been used to implement an elisp > interpreter, shave micro cycles from the time of a Java vm , and by GCC > itself. I might look at nipping all that in the bud tomorrow, although I > think I have looked at this once before.
thanks. - erik
