On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 22:01, Melvin Smith wrote: > Subs, co-routines and continuations are at a very limited, but functional > state. > > Basically you can create a PMC with a bytecode address or label > and use the call/callco/callcc ops on it. >
Subs seem to be broken right now. Here is a pasm file set_addr I0, MYSUB new P0, .Sub, I0 call end MYSUB: print "this is the sub\n" ret and the output from running the associated pbc file > ./parrot rough.pbc Segmentation fault > ./parrot -t rough.pbc PC=0; OP=65 (set_addr_i_ic); ARGS=(I0=0, 9) PC=3; OP=727 (new_p_ic_i); ARGS=(P0=0x81403c0, 9, I0=135578484) PC=7; OP=757 (call) If I understand things correctly, the problem is that the address argument (i.e. the last argument) to the new op is being ignored, and sub->init is always set to 0. So the call op is returning 0 as the next op for the interpreter (in core.ops): goto ADDRESS(sub->init); /* always 0 */ Is there a different pasm syntax I should be using for creating and calling subs? I seem to remember some discussion about changing how things are passed to constructors but I am not sure what the conclusion was. -- Jonathan Sillito
