Joseph F. Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think you should try to implement lamda through .Sub's. Take a look > at parrot/t/pmc/sub.t for some examples. However, you might not be > able to rely on IMCC to handle arguments and results so much, since I > don't think IMCC uses the new cps calling style yet. (but I'm not > sure, so don't hold me to that :)
First yep, as already stated in another f'up. Regarding the state of Parrot calling conventions inside the imcc part of parrot: - calling a sub in done (prototyped, non_prototyped) - receiving params in sub too (prototyped, non_prototyped, both) - type checking for non_protoyped cases seems also to be quite fine - return values need more work (Dan promised to do more specs on that) currently prototyped return values are working. All overflow stuff (more then 11 args of one register kind) is totally untested and might kill your dog if you use it - or it works. leo
