Re: [PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 01:32:44PM -0700, Scott Walters wrote: On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Mike Lambert wrote: Scott Walters wrote: Part of the beauty of PMCs is that you can have very compact storage given a dedicated eg int array type. Generating these would not be a bad thing. The

Re: [PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

Mike, Part of the beauty of PMCs is that you can have very compact storage given a dedicated eg int array type. Generating these would not be a bad thing. The typical case still remains, that arrays will contained mixtures of all datatypes. On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Mike Lambert wrote: This patch

Re: [PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

Scott Walters wrote: Part of the beauty of PMCs is that you can have very compact storage given a dedicated eg int array type. Generating these would not be a bad thing. The typical case still remains, that arrays will contained mixtures of all datatypes. Yep, I agree. Thus, array.pmc would

Re: [PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

Mike, Was very happy to see your message. People don't often agree with me. I'm not very agreeable. On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Mike Lambert wrote: Scott Walters wrote: Part of the beauty of PMCs is that you can have very compact storage given a dedicated eg int array type. Generating these

[PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

This patch is rather questionable, and thus I did not commit it directly. However, it illustrates a point I wanted to make. As mentioned in my recent PARROT QUESTIONS email, a lot of the clutter in the PMC aggregates can be removed with the use of redirecting functions. The below patch reduces

Re: [PATCH] Reduce array.pmc keyed code

This patch is rather questionable, and thus I did not commit it directly. However, it illustrates a point I wanted to make. Doh! Hopefully my previous post will make a bit more sense now. :) Mike Lambert Index: array.pmc ===