Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 9:16 PM +0100 11/16/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>This would imply a distinct return opcode instead of C<invoke P1>. > That went in, or was supposed to go in, as part of moving the return > continuation into the interpreter struct. I presume this hasn't > happened? It was supposed so, yes. But: Please read the start of the thread "calling conventions, tracebacks, and register allocator", from Nov 6th. I asked about the return sequence. Your answer was: "no changes to the calling conventions". So it didn't happen, yet. leo
