Re: Using int32_t instead of IV for code

[Philip Kendall]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 06:38:56PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> 
> I was thinking more that we'd have a type OP for opcodes, for example. 
> #typedef'd to int, or long, or int32_t, but conceptually standalone so we 
> could change it if need be. (The possibility still exists that we might 
> shrink to 16 bit opcodes...)

That should be possible from my patch just by replacing all occurences
of `int32_t' with `OP' (and then getting something into the configure
system to set the typedef).

Phil

-- 
  Philip Kendall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~pak21/