>>>>> "JH" == Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JH> 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
JH> Maybe just a bit for that on an(y) opcode?
that means an extra test for every opcode vs. inserting one opcode extra
per statement. i think the extra op code is a win there. also the op
code doesn't have to be inserted. it could be optimized out if no
debugging (at that level) is needed. also it would probably have no
arguments which makes it a fast op code to dispatch.
uri
--
Uri Guttman --------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------- http://www.sysarch.com
SYStems ARCHitecture and Stem Development ------ http://www.stemsystems.com
Learn Advanced Object Oriented Perl from Damian Conway - Boston, July 10-11
Class and Registration info: http://www.sysarch.com/perl/OOP_class.html
