Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nah, those work. And I'm using quite a number of them as part of the > postgres wrapper. (One of the reasons I have a non-jit build, since > they're not implemented in it)
If JIT can't build a signature like 'L' or whatnot, it falls back to hard-wired constructed functions. Or at least it should. Did you actually test it. A propos test ... you know it ;) I'm still thinking that we should reduce the amount of signatures. Some special pointer types could be ok, though, *if* we can find something for/against the in/out problem. leo
