On Saturday 08 December 2007 08:29:05 Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 December 2007 15:49:45 Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> >> What it implemented (when I get chance, which should be this weekend) as
> >> an arity method on the Sub PMC?
> > That would be much nice
chromatic wrote:
On Thursday 06 December 2007 15:49:45 Jonathan Worthington wrote:
What it implemented (when I get chance, which should be this weekend) as
an arity method on the Sub PMC?
That would be much nicer
Implemented in r23598 for the Sub PMC.
(which doesn't make sense with
On Thursday 06 December 2007 15:49:45 Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> >> If there isn't a better way to do this, how would I get the arity of a
> >> subroutine?
> > I'm not sure you can from PIR, which I've argued is a problem. I think
> > eventually we'll have to have some meta
very behind on everything while moving apartment and country, but
here's a start on catching up...
chromatic wrote:
If there isn't a better way to do this, how would I get the arity of a
subroutine?
I'm not sure you can from PIR, which I've argued is a problem. I think
eventually we'l
On Friday 30 November 2007 10:54:46 istarex wrote:
> What's the recommended way of implementing a partial application
> language in Parrot? So far the best I've thought is to compile all
> calls to an auxillary procedure that either makes a tail call to the
> actual subroutine (if enough args are
