Front page | perl.perl6.internals |
Postings from September 2001
--- Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> wrote: > At 03:48 PM 9/4/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes: > > > > > > DS> Ah. I've always wanted to do that with tied > hashes. Okay, even > > DS> more reason to pass the data in! (We're going to > end up with a > > DS> WANT register by the time we're done...) > > > >that is not a bad idea. we could allocate a PMC register > (e.g. #31) > >permanently to store WANT info (in a hash i assume like > the RFC > >implies). > > I don't think I'd want to soak up a PMC register that > way. Maybe an integer > one. Maybe not a general purpose PMC register, but what about a special one? Since the proposal was to lazily update it, it doesn't need to be part of the standard register frame. Besides, I though we were going with having a few "special" PMC registers (PL_sv_yes, PL_sv_no, PL_sv_undef, etc.) to reduce the size of the constants section? -- BKS __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.comThread Previous | Thread Next