# New Ticket Created by Chip Salzenberg
# Please include the string: [perl #36283]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36283 >
It makes sense to allow e.g. C<$P0 = add $P1, $P2> as alternative
syntax for C. How
Bob Rogers wrote:
So, IMHO, it seems more versatile to have these opcodes operate on
one arg/return at a time, instead of monolithically on the whole list:
set_arg , ,
If somehow possible, I'd really like to avoid indirect register
addressing. The register allocator can't track t
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:48:06AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Bob Rogers wrote:
> > So, IMHO, it seems more versatile to have these opcodes operate on
> >one arg/return at a time, instead of monolithically on the whole list:
> >
> > set_arg , ,
>
> If somehow possible, I'd really like
{Pre-Post-Script: After all this trouble below, which is hairy and yet
not even complete, parameter-by-parameter conversion is actually
starting to look good for complex cases. Despite all my reasons
against it. I start to suspect that we need both; that get_params
can be used for cases that
On Sunday 12 June 2005 16:28, Will Coleda via RT wrote:
> Jens - is this still an issue?
yes. I've no clue whats wrong. Maybe its a perl 5.6.0 bug.
I don't know how to fix it.
jens
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
>
> > Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:57:09PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> >
> > >>Yes. The compiler does the right thing. It sensibly reports
> > >>that sizeof(PMC) = 24
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #36286]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36286 >
My system couldn't handle an optimized compile of ops/core_ops_switch.c.
Ideally, th
On 6/14/05, Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> .sub __add
> .param MyType $P0 :flags(0x40) # or @flags(0x40)? - inv. w/o colon
> (e.g.)
> .param $I0 :flags(0x20) # invocant with colon (e.g.)
...
> What do you think?
I think the typecodes are unnecessary
From: Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:06 +0200
Bob Rogers wrote:
. . .
>To ignore a parameter, simply don't fetch it. To ignore a return,
> simply don't supply a register for it.
Yep - that's still doable, but not in the middle, which l
