> -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:dan@;sidhe.org] > > At 2:07 PM +0000 11/14/02, "Jürgen" "Bömmels" (via RT) wrote: > >This patch obsoletes #17109 (which isn't applied yet). > > Does it obsolete 18170?
No, it seems to depend on it. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jürgen Bömmels (via RT) > > DEPENDS ON #18170 [... reordered ...] > One thing I'm not very happy about that I need 2 pop_pads at function > return, one cleaning up the newly generated pad from new_pad, and one > for cleaning up the stored scope of function definition. I have no > idea how to solve this. Well currently the way to return from a sub is using the ret op. It may be useful to add a 'return' op that does one pop of the lexical stack (in addition to doing what ret does). This would mean that a sub would only need an explicit pop_pad for each local scope created. However, subs that are not closures could continue using the ret op. (So Dan, should I submit a patch adding a 'return' op?). -- Jonathan Sillito
