On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 23:45 -0500, Swaroop Sridhar wrote: > There is some kind of term rotation: > box, the type constructor --> ref > box, the value constructor --> dup > ref --> stack-ref > unbox without copy --> dref
I initially came up with a similar list, but it isn't just term rotation. First, unbox should never have had copy. unbox == dref. Second, dup() only accepts unboxed things. This restriction does not apply to box() Yes, ref() is now stack-ref. This is because I am trying to distinguish cleanly between reference types, and we realized today that ref could induce closure conversion. This leads me to the conclusion that ref is the underlying mechanism of *all* closure capture, and the more specialized form of stack reference should be the one that gets the more specialized name. The key change, I think, is the type restrictions on REF and UNREF. shap _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
