Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Roger Browne
> > >If so, why do we specify S0 here?) > > > > Just for convenience. In most places, I don't use the string. I'd rather just get the PMC. Regards, Roger Browne

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Leopold Toetsch
On Nov 25, 2005, at 23:45, Leopold Toetsch wrote: The last (and never done correctly) relict of old calling conventions... ... is gone now. Please consult docs/compiler_faq.pod or this thread for using get_results instead. From r10257 Exception handler code: P5 is gone The compat code ca

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Chip Salzenberg
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 04:26:09PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Coke: > >If so, why do we specify S0 here?) > > Just for convenience. I appreciate the convenience argument, but given the ease of keyed access, $P0[0] is pretty darned convenient already. And someday we may want to pass things t

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Will Coleda
On Nov 29, 2005, at 8:38 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote: Chip Salzenberg wrote: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:45:40PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: catch_label: get_results "(...)", Pexcept, Smessage, ... # whatever This part is now implemented (r10241). (Funnily it did work immediately :

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Leopold Toetsch wrote: Syntactic sugar, ... Done - r10243. Again exactly 2 arguments are supported for now: handler: .local pmc e .local string mess .get_results (e, mess) Variable decls after the handler label aren't instructions and therefore ok. See also t/pm

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Will Coleda wrote: On Nov 29, 2005, at 8:38 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote: handler: get_results "(0,0)", P0, S0 Currently, partcl stores extra information in P5[9] - Would it be available as P0[9] in your example? (If so, is the message still available as P0[0] ? Sure. Nothing has

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Will Coleda
On Nov 29, 2005, at 8:38 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote: Chip Salzenberg wrote: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:45:40PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: catch_label: get_results "(...)", Pexcept, Smessage, ... # whatever This part is now implemented (r10241). (Funnily it did work immediately :

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-29 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Chip Salzenberg wrote: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:45:40PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: catch_label: get_results "(...)", Pexcept, Smessage, ... # whatever This part is now implemented (r10241). (Funnily it did work immediately :) Currently exactly these 2 arguments (exception, messag

Re: exception handlers & calling conventions

2005-11-27 Thread Chip Salzenberg
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:45:40PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Technically an excpetion is kind of an object with some info (TODO) and > the exception handler is a (limited) continuation: > > pmclass Exception_Handler extends Continuation ... # see classes/ Neat. > catch_label: >