On Sep 22, 2005, at 03:46, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
[ghenriksen - Thu Feb 05 20:15:50 2004]:
Leo,
The patch is at the URL below, and I've split it into 4 for you. The
classes-include-lib patch must be applied before any of the other 3.
I've resolved the 3-4 conflicts that occurred since the patch was
first
abortively submitted on Monday, so the old patch (named
20040202-pmc-accessors.patch) should be discarded if it resurfaces.
http://www.ma.iclub.com/pub/parrot/
I realized that some of the accessor macros should've been named
PObj_*
instead of PMC_* (since they apply to STRINGs and Buffers, too).
So they
are as of this patch. I've also macro-ized access to UnionVal in
general, since it was sometimes used outside of the context of a
pobj. [*]
The old syntax continues to work, and so nobody's patches will break
excl. those w conflicts. But the pobj->cache.foo_val and
PMC_ptr1p/PMC_ptr2v macros ought to be treated as deprecated.
—
Gordon Henriksen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[* - Somewhat inadvisedly, I think. UnionVal is 8 bytes on a 32-bit
architecture, but bloats to 16 bytes on a 64-bit architecture. The
generic containers which use UnionVal don't appear to use both ptrs
simultaneously or make use of the void*/int pair, so could use an
8-byte
structure as their bucket type.]
The URL for the patches seems to be dead. Do you still want your
patches to be considered?
-J
There's absolutely no way that these patches would still apply
cleanly. It would be less work to recreate them than to attempt to
resolve the conflicts.
—
Gordon Henriksen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
