On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > He's worried that the P6C tests > > break, > > ... albeit this is still an issue. Nobody answered, if we need another > Sub class implementing the old invoke/ret scheme ...
I'd say "no". P6C is now compiling to an obsolete architecture. While we should all step back and be impressed at how well Intel has maintained backward compatibility in the x86, there's no particular reason we should do so ourselves. Rather, someone (me) needs to port P6C to the new machine. > > Whee! My first anniversary! > > Congrats and thanks for your great summaries. Seconded. /s
