On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 01:47:54PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote: > Either way is fine with me. Let me know and I'll check in an updated > version...
Well, uh, neither, actually. :) I think the implementation of "rotate" is broken, since the parameters to rotate_entries are all stuffed up. I'm amazed this compiles: core_ops.c: rotate_entries(interpreter, cur_opcode[1]); stacks.c:void rotate_entries(struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, struct StackChunk *base_chunk, struct Stack_Entry *top, INTVAL depth) -- It's difficult to see the picture when you are inside the frame.
