At 04:39 PM 6/12/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > > David L. Nicol [made an akward metaphor with data as summer campers]
> > This is a considerably less simple problem than you (and *definitely* I)
> > might like. :(
>
>I appear to be suggesting that deferability be an add-on that causes some
>rewriting to support itself, rather than an optimization to parse away
>bothering with silly calculations that we will never see the results of.
That's fine, and we may end up going that route. I'd rather not, as it
either shoots the optimizer badly, or requires the generated bytecode to be
a lot more complex. (Basically requiring two code paths depending on
whether data's active or not)
>Got to make the programmers worry about _something!_
Sure, but why this?
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
