> At 12:54 AM -0400 6/3/04, Benjamin K. Stuhl wrote:
>>(with one major caveat: if the _vtable_ functions try to use the
>>PMC's address as an index into some data structure, things will go
>>wrong since the PMC the base vtable functions get no longer has the
>>same address as the logical PMC; if ex
> All~
>
> Perhaps I am missing something in this discussion, but wouldn't it be
> possible to have the vtable within a PMC be layered rather than the PMC
> itself. This would allow the data portion of PMC's to remain in a fixed
> location, while allowing new vtable layers to be pushed/popped.
-Original Message-
> Date: Fri Jan 23 09:27:12 EST 2004
> From: "Dan Sugalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 10:37 PM -0500 1/22/04, Benjamin K. Stuhl wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >>In addition to the thread autolocking front end and debugging front
> >>end vtable functions, both of which ca
