Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The interpreter stuff's simple enough--we teach the ops preprocessor > to handle them the same way that it does string constants, and index > into the PMC constant table. We'll want to put them in a separate > part of the bytecode file,
Why I second table? This just adds duplicate code paths and complexity. One constant table ought to be enough. > so we can fully expose bytecode files to running code. And we need to > finish that fight over freeze/thaw methodologies, as constant PMCs > would end up being frozen in the bytecode. The freeze/thaw internals can change. We only have to invalidate existing PBCs, if the frozen image format differs. > As for the actual declaration of the constants... That's going to be > somewhat interesting. I can see one of two ways of doing it: > 1) we execute the initialization code at compiletime and freeze the result > 2) We compile the initialization code and execute it at runtime to > create the PMC It probably depends on the PMC. *If* there are any side effects, initialization has to be done at run time. leo
