At 02:23 PM 7/7/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:07:52PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 01:00 PM 7/7/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > >Would it make sense / be useful to have also distinct "between
> > >statements" callbacks?
> >
> > Yup. For the debugger if nothing else, and it's a good place to put
> cleanup
> > code, so... I expect we'll have an "end of statement" opcode
>
>Maybe just a bit for that on an(y) opcode?
Well, I'd figured we'd have:
*) A 'pending event' bit that would be checked per-opcode.
*) An 'end-of-statement' opcode that the compiler would put in at the end
of each statement
*) An 'end of block' opcode that the compiler would put in at the end of
each block
The 'end of' opcodes would be able to have extra functions stacked on them
so we could do arbitrary things after the end of every statement or block.
(As well as on an individual block or statement boundary)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
