On Mar-12, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 9:49 AM +0100 3/12/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >>Calling a method:
> >>
> >> object.variable(pararms)
> >
> >Do we need the more explicit pcc_call syntax too:
> >
> > .pcc_begin
> > .arg x
> > .meth_call PObj, ("meth" | PMeth ) [, PReturnContinuation ]
> > .result r
> > .pcc_end
>
> Sure. Or we could make it:
>
> .pcc_begin
> .arg x
> .object y
> .meth_call "foo"
> .result r
> .pcc_end
>
> to make things simpler.
I vote yes -- until we add AST input to imcc, making the args and
invocant be line-oriented makes code generation easier for the Perl6
compiler, at least. (Although I might do it the 1st way anyway, just
because I spend so much time staring at generated code.)
But I had to stare at the ".object" for a second before I realized you
weren't just giving the type of another arg -- would it be better to
use ".invocant"?
