At 10:32 PM 12/6/2001 -0500, Jeff G wrote:
>There appears to be an omission in the API... A way to assign to a
>particular index of the aggregate. We have ke_value that assigns to a
>{INSP} register, but no way to assign from an {INSP} register. I'll just
>create a ke_set_value unless I hear any s
Tests passed...
---cut here---
new_key S0
clone_key S1,S0
size_key S1,5
key_size I0,S1
print "I0 (3) "
print I0
print "\n"
toss_key S0
#ke_type I1,S1,1
ke_set_value S1,0,5
ke_value I0,S1,0
ke_type I1,S1,0
print "I0 (5) I1 (0): "
print I0
print " "
print I
Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> At 12:52 AM 12/5/2001 -0500, Jeff G wrote:
> >The fact that the S registers are in fact generic struct registers is
> >not evident from outside the internal code. For those of us implementing
> >instructions, it might be useful to explicitly cast values like $1 to
> >the c
--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:28 AM 12/5/2001 -0500, Jason Gloudon wrote:
> >Using the aggregate's vtable is another way of getting
> the job done that
> >avoids all the extra reference PMCs. However, references
> will have to be
> >supported.
>
> References are interestin
At 12:52 AM 12/5/2001 -0500, Jeff G wrote:
>The fact that the S registers are in fact generic struct registers is
>not evident from outside the internal code. For those of us implementing
>instructions, it might be useful to explicitly cast values like $1 to
>the correct type, in order to make sur
At 10:28 AM 12/5/2001 -0500, Jason Gloudon wrote:
>Using the aggregate's vtable is another way of getting the job done that
>avoids all the extra reference PMCs. However, references will have to be
>supported.
References are interesting. I'm currently thinking that:
*) PMCs should have a get_r
At 12:18 AM 12/5/2001 -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
>Dan Sugalski:
># 'Kay, here's the preliminary assembly-level docs for keys,
># which is how
># we're going to be accessing entries in aggregates.
>
>I'm probably just inexperienced and idiotic, but what's wrong with
>simple 'get_from_aggregate target,
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 12:18:53AM -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> I'm probably just inexperienced and idiotic, but what's wrong with
> simple 'get_from_aggregate target, aggregate, key' and maybe
> 'get_list_from_aggregate target_list, aggregate, key_list'? (Obviously
> we'd shorten the names, but yo
Dan Sugalski:
# 'Kay, here's the preliminary assembly-level docs for keys,
# which is how
# we're going to be accessing entries in aggregates.
I'm probably just inexperienced and idiotic, but what's wrong with
simple 'get_from_aggregate target, aggregate, key' and maybe
'get_list_from_aggregate t
Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> 'Kay, here's the preliminary assembly-level docs for keys, which is how
> we're going to be accessing entries in aggregates.
>
> --Snip here---
> =head2 Key operations
>
> Keys are used to get access to individual elements of an aggregate
> variab
'Kay, here's the preliminary assembly-level docs for keys, which is how
we're going to be accessing entries in aggregates.
--Snip here---
=head2 Key operations
Keys are used to get access to individual elements of an aggregate
variable. This is done to allow for opaque,
11 matches
Mail list logo
