On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 11:54:08AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > The bytecode segments can hold more than just bytecode. They can also > hold the source that corresponds to the generated bytecode, the AST > for the source that corresponds to the generated bytecode, the line > number information for the generated bytecode (for error reporting), > and potentially some pieces of raw binary data, both for program > needs and potential future expansion.
On a serious note, I think column number information for syntax errors (if available) would be useful for languages such as perl (and not just Befunge) For example, it would let a single stepping debugger show you progress through the statement. > =item Add binary data chunk to segment > > Add in some raw binary data to the bytecode segment For each call this puts the binary into its own chunk? If not, what's wrong with having binary data stored as a "string" in the string constant pool? Nicholas Clark -- Befunge better than perl? http://www.perl.org/advocacy/spoofathon/
