On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 11:27:24AM +0200, Paolo Molaro wrote:
> ... and to go a step further in sanity and maintainability, I'd suggest
> using a structure with properly typed function pointers instead of an
> array:
>
> typedef void (*parrot_pmc_add) (PMC *dest, PMC *a, PMC *b);
> typedef void (*parrot_pmc_dispose) (PMC *cookie);
> ...
I've now changed the vtable structure to reflect this, but I'd like someone to
confirm that the "variant" forms of the ops can be addressed the way I think
they can. (ie. structure->base_element + 1 to get "thing after base_element")
Simon
--
Old Japanese proverb:
There are two kinds of fools -- those who never climb Mt. Fuji,
and those who climb it twice.
