At 10:26 PM 12/18/2001 +0100, Marcus Petersson wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I wonder if it's possible to add your own custom opcodes yet. What I have
>in mind are ops for about 10 external functions. AFAIK, there are at least
>four things that need to be added:
>
>1. The bytecode format need codes for the new ops.
>
>2. The assembler format need names for the new ops.
>
>3. Both 1 and 2 need defined arguments to each op.
>
>4. The actual code that the new ops execute. FYI, they should call
> functions in a shared library.
Hmmm. For the moment throw them into core.ops in a local copy. I'll work up
a protocol for adding ops files over the next day or so and document it.
>Unfortunately, the docs doesn't seem to reveal where or how to add these
>things. Some mails by Gregor give a few hints, but it's not enough.
Joys of the undefined, alas.
>It's also possible that I need to use an external type or C++ class as
>argument (read-only) for some of the ops, which I suppose means I need
>to use PMCs. Is this possible yet?
I'm not quite sure what you mean. The answer's probably, but do please
explain more fully. :)
>Btw, wouldn't it be good to set up a parrot-user ML soon?
Once the core implementation's actually solid. We've not gotten hashes,
subs, packages, exceptions, or threads well-defined yet, not to mention
user-loaded opcode libs.
>And shouldn't
>this list rather be called parrot-dev? I imagine that once implementation
>of Perl6 starts, it will otherwise be swamped with Perl-specific issues.
We'll burn that bridge when we come to it. Probably in a few months
)depending on how the donation thing goes) we'll be in need of it, and then
we will.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
