If memory serves me right, Dan Sugalski wrote: > >> Why would we want to avoid this? It looks exactly like what ought to > >> happen.
If you can provide that in-vm , it would be a lot faster ...(hmm, that's one argument that should convince you ;) But like I said , I need lots of sticky notes for all the opcodes for parrot ...(I'm still in "can't remember all opcodes" mode).... > Just because C# does it doesn't mean that he likes it. :) To end all further debate -- *) C# has something like this , *) I can't see what Dan has in head for parrot , *) I don't want feature creep into parrot *) Our C# -> JVM compiler already has the workarounds for this like: invokestatic "MyStruct" "copyIn__" "(LMyStruct;)LMyStruct;" *) I really don't like valuetypes that much :). *) Rhys will be doing most of the design , this is his headache actually :-) So does that cover all bases ?.... Gopal -- The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success
