On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:23:02PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> That should really be eq_i_ic_ic. (Well, actually there should be only one
> label, and we fall through otherwise. It's a bug in implementation and
> assembly, not opcode name... :)
Patches are... :)
> I was using a trailing c to note a constant since we're using the opcode
> name as a C function name, and we're not counting on case-sensitivity in
> symbols.
*nodnod*. I knew there was a reason something smelt funny about that.
> Other than that (well, and Simon has a patch in to the repository to yank
> out the opcode numbers entirely from opcode_table) it looks keen.
Brian, if you could cvs update (or grab the snapshot from
http://www.netthink.co.uk/downloads/parrot-0.0.1.tar.gz) and rework your
patch given Dan's comments, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks,
Simon
