Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 10:07:06AM +1000, Vasily Chekalkin wrote:
Few days ago I created branch for implementing mathematical ops in term
of i_ops. E.g. "c = add a, b" implemented as "c = a; c+= b". No test
failures (actually I fixed some i_ops which was wrong before. E.g.
Integer.i_add(Complex) and so on), so I'm going to merge this branch to
trunk.
Any objections?
I object, somewhat strongly.
If I'm reading the branch diff correctly, it appears to be
replacing most instances of
dest = pmc_new(INTERP, VTABLE_type(INTERP, SELF));
with
dest = SELF.clone();
However, these are not exactly the same thing. In particular,
I can imagine that a VTABLE_clone operation for some (derived)
PMC types could be a lot more expensive than simply creating
a new empty instance, which is what happens now.
Objection accepted. I can replace SELF.clone with pmc_new. OTOH, this
behaviour is more consistent with HLL. Consider next example:
$P0 = new ['somehll', 'Integer']
$P1 = new ['somehll', 'Integer']
$P2 = $P0 + $P1
With SELF.clone $P2 type will be ['somehll', 'Integer'] without any
additional work from hll implementers.
--
Bacek
_______________________________________________
http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
