At 10:08 PM +0100 1/24/02, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
>Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > According to this document the set_p_n_i notation would be wrong. But
>> > I already heard that the index-system is a moving target.
>>
>> In this case, I'd prefer you trusted the documentation.
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > According to this document the set_p_n_i notation would be wrong. But
> > I already heard that the index-system is a moving target.
>
> In this case, I'd prefer you trusted the documentation. :)
Which one parrot_assembly.pod or core_ops.pod? They are
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 05:23 PM 1/24/2002 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > > * Introduce a new register-type for Keys.
> >
> >No, I don't think this is the right way.
>
> Just a question, what is the status of the Scheme parser. Is it
> even ready to generate code for worki
At 05:23 PM 1/24/2002 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > * Introduce a new register-type for Keys.
>
>No, I don't think this is the right way.
Just a question, what is the status of the Scheme parser. Is it even
ready to generate code for working with these constructs? Maybe work top
down on this on
At 06:11 PM 1/24/2002 +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
>I've no idea which is the best way to go. The Pair-Implementation just
>needs one way to get a PMC-value of an (constant) index.
>
>I will delay my patch until this issue is solved
Maybe you could bang on this issue and work out a good solutio
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:11:46PM +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
>code destination, dest_key, source1, source1_key, source2, source2_key
>
> The key parameters are optional, and may be either an integer or a
> string. [...] Any time a source or destination can be a PMC register,
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > To implement nested pairs its nessary to introduce 2 new vtable functions
> > and the acompaning core.ops to get and set the PMC value of the indexed
> > element. I choosed set_p_p_i and set_p_i_p. The later one is inconsistent
> > with indexed set op
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 09:57:49PM +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
> Ok, here is the updated schemepair-patch.
Thanks for this, but I'm afraid I'm not going to apply it. The reason
being:
> To implement nested pairs its nessary to introduce 2 new vtable functions
> and the acompaning core.ops to
