On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 03:35:10PM -0000, Parrot wrote: > The getprop op is strange because it has a signature getprop_p_s_p. By > analogy, the getattr opcode has signature getattr_p_p_s. setprop_p_s_p and > setattr_p_s_p are similar and are not a problem. > > getprop_p_s_p should be changed to getprop_p_p_s for symmetry with other > ops.
Note that Rakudo uses this opcode heavily. > Also, we should take some time to reconsider the whole properties > mechanism, since I don't think it is used often. It *is* used, but not > often and I'm not sure that it's the best mechanism for doing what we want > to do with it. Note that Rakudo uses this opcode heavily. All of Rakudo's ability to maintain container types, r/w, flattening behavior, subroutine signatures, etc. is based on the properties mechanism. Rakudo even has its own dynop to enable a set of PMCs to share the same prophash (e.g., in arrays, where all of the elements have a common type constraint). So far it works well for us (if perhaps a little expensive), so consider this a tag that says "there's at least one heavy user of this feature" before we mess with it too much. :-) Pm _______________________________________________ parrot-tickets mailing list [email protected] http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-tickets
