Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-12-08 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 9:18 AM -0700 12/3/03, Cory Spencer wrote: > We're already using 'eq' to perform equality testing, and in the interests of maintaining a consistent design I would choose to stick with something eq-related as opposed to changing it to 'same'. eqaddr/eqval? eq_addr/eq_val? eq_address/eq_valu

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-12-03 Thread Cory Spencer
> I don't think there was ever a consensus about opcode naming. > It seems that we need this but can you give an example > of where you are using it, just to give me some context to think > with? I've been implementing a Lisp interpretter (and hopefully at some point, compiler) and was using the

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-12-03 Thread Melvin Smith
L PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: Determining PMC memory addresses > We're already using 'eq' to perform equality testing, and in the interests > of maintaining a consistent design I would choose to stick with something > eq-related as opposed to chan

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-12-03 Thread Cory Spencer
> We're already using 'eq' to perform equality testing, and in the interests > of maintaining a consistent design I would choose to stick with something > eq-related as opposed to changing it to 'same'. > > eqaddr/eqval? eq_addr/eq_val? eq_address/eq_value? So just to follow up on this thread,

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Jos Visser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would therefore vote that we keep these opcodes as verbose as > possible. So no eq/eql/equal, but rather > same_address/same_content/compare/compare_as_num/compare_as_string. Or as verbose as needed [1]: ident, eq, , _num, _string for in (lt le gt ge)

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Cory Spencer
> We're already using 'eq' to perform equality testing, and in the interests > of maintaining a consistent design I would choose to stick with something > eq-related as opposed to changing it to 'same'. > > eqaddr/eqval? eq_addr/eq_val? eq_address/eq_value? Oops, correction there - I'd forgotte

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Cory Spencer
> I think this is definitely something we should do if we want to confuse > people as much as possible :-) This is likely true, seeing as I *still* have troubles keeping the various Lisp eq/eql/equal/equalp's straight. ;) > I would therefore vote that we keep these opcodes as verbose as > possib

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Jos Visser
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 10:27:45AM -0700 it came to pass that Cory Spencer wrote: > > > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > > > > > Op vtable Meaning > > > > - is_same PMCs are ident > > > > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value > > > > Y cmp

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Cory Spencer
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > > > Op vtable Meaning > > > - is_same PMCs are ident > > > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value > > > Y cmp cmp PMCs > > > - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically > > > - cmp_string cmp PMCs as strin

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Simon Glover
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Cory Spencer wrote: > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > Op vtable Meaning > > - is_same PMCs are ident > > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value > > Y cmp cmp PMCs > > - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically > > - cm

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Cory Spencer
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Op vtable Meaning > - is_same PMCs are ident > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value > Y cmp cmp PMCs > - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically > - cmp_string cmp PMCs as strings > > Proposals for opcode nam

Re: Determining PMC memory addresses

2003-11-28 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Cory Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any way in PASM to determine whether or not two PMC's share the > same memory address? Not yet. We have the vtable methods but the opcodes are missing. We have: Op vtable Meaning - is_same PMCs are ident - is_equal PMCs are equ