At 10:41 PM +0100 2/17/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Either way, I don't think IMCC should have to deal with language
symbols explicitly.
Zhat's true. But still we need to know, *what are* language symbols.
I've stated several times that for the spilling code its essential
to k
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Either way, I don't think IMCC should have to deal with language symbols
explicitly.
Zhat's true. But still we need to know, *what are* language symbols.
I've stated several times that for the spilling code its essential to
know, if a symbol has already a store in either lex
At 12:26 PM -0500 2/11/04, Melvin Smith wrote:
The request, mainly, is for imcc to handle sigil characters
from other languages which basically equates to exposing
a lot to imcc from the high-level language.
If you're looking for a "How do I use $foo in my imcc code?" then I
have one of two answer
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another option is to use quotes for symbols with sigils,
And we have to cope with unicode finally. So I'd vote for that
alternative. *But* as code normally comes out of a compiler and there
may be many different compilers, we can't deal with arbitrary sym
Jonathan Worthington writes:
> I would go with the idea of having a sigil that is placed before all local
> variables, and another (different!) sigil for registers (of the IMCC-handled
> type). Anything without one of those is a direct register access. Or a
> syntax error. Clean, simple rules.
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:04:53 -0500, Matt Fowles
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All~
>
>I don't like the leading C<.> option, what about having a leading _ for
I don't care. Really, I don't care. I kinda like $, but I don't care.
I currently get by just with $[I.N.S.P]nnn symbolic temporaries
because
Hi,
> I don't like the leading C<.> option, what about having a leading _ for
> temporaries instead and allowing any non-space, non-operator character
> in symbol names, so _$foo would be a valid temp. This has the advantage
> of not conflicting with symbolic registers.
>
But could it potentially
All~
I don't like the leading C<.> option, what about having a leading _ for
temporaries instead and allowing any non-space, non-operator character
in symbol names, so _$foo would be a valid temp. This has the advantage
of not conflicting with symbolic registers.
The other option is to force
RFD = Request For Discussion ;)
Much discussion has been made on IRC concerning
symbol names.
The request, mainly, is for imcc to handle sigil characters
from other languages which basically equates to exposing
a lot to imcc from the high-level language. I won't
argue how much of that is good or b
