On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 10:31:13AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: At 6:59 AM + 3/27/04, Simon Cozens wrote:
: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Gottman) writes:
: >> This function would be very useful in inner loops, so if it is possible
: >> to
: >> implement it more efficiently in the core than as a sub
At 6:59 AM + 3/27/04, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Gottman) writes:
This function would be very useful in inner loops, so if it is possible to
implement it more efficiently in the core than as a sub in a module I think
we should do so.
And, if it's possible to implement it more
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Gottman) writes:
> This function would be very useful in inner loops, so if it is possible to
> implement it more efficiently in the core than as a sub in a module I think
> we should do so.
And, if it's possible to implement it more efficiently in the core than as a
sub in
- Original Message -
From: "Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Juerd writes:
> > Has this C already been decided?
>
> Doesn't matter, because most of these decisions are up for discussion.
> I think everything that was "decided" when Apocalypse 3 was written has
> changed at least three
