On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:21:40 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 11:31:19PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > Merijn notices this line in 5.8.x in S_new_logop
> >
> > if ((type == OP_AND) == (SvTRUE(((SVOP*)first)->op_sv))) {
> >
> > It's wonky. I
On 9/20/05, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > what's OP_DOR?
> >
> > //
>
> Now that defined-or has an opcode, is
>
> if(defined(EXPR)){...
>
> optimized to use it instead of calling OP_DEFINED?
you mean unless(defined(EXPR)) surely... No, it's not, currently.
On 9/20/05, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/20/05, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > what's OP_DOR?
>
> //
Now that defined-or has an opcode, is
if(defined(EXPR)){...
optimized to use it instead of calling OP_DEFINED?
--
David L Nicol
"Abkey, deafghee, jeky
On 9/20/05, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what's OP_DOR?
//
what's OP_DOR?
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 11:31:19PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Merijn notices this line in 5.8.x in S_new_logop
>
> if ((type == OP_AND) == (SvTRUE(((SVOP*)first)->op_sv))) {
>
> It's wonky. It seems to be wrong. But it's been that way since 5.8.0 started.
>
> The corresponding point in ble
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> Merijn notices this line in 5.8.x in S_new_logop
>
> if ((type == OP_AND) == (SvTRUE(((SVOP*)first)->op_sv))) {
>
> It's wonky. It seems to be wrong. But it's been that way since 5.8.0 started.
>
> The corresponding point in blead is
>
> if ((
