Wolfgang Lenerz writes: > Sorry but A6,A5 does indeed point to the *end* of the command string at > least when the job is invoked by EX it doesn't point to any data area
Yes, the documentation is a bit misleading here. <> > Apart form that, I think we agree on the Ex mechanism. > > (...) > > > > > QLib does, of course, know about the space taken up by the channels and > > command string and so, if it likes, can scribble all over it. It cant > > scribble over "my" area as, as far as it is concerned, that memory > > doesnt belong to it. > > So a6,a5 would stay where it is. > > > I hope this clarifies matters. However, the point is moot at present, > > since it seems that at a different solution is currently the favourite. > > Could you agree to it? The only power a volunteer has in cases such as these is to give or to withhold his work, so of course I agree ;) But do you agree that the concept of stacking information on top of the stack, as outlined invarious mails in recent days, is theoretically feasable? Per _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
