Greetings! Raymond Toy <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>>> "Camm" == Camm Maguire <[email protected]> writes: > > Camm> Greetings! Henry Baker <[email protected]> writes: > > >> Does GCL use some sort of bit mask for argument lists? > >> > >> That's fine, but I'm having trouble understanding when a bit > >> mask will be useful beyond -- e.g., 32 arguments. > >> > >> After than, either the function accepts _any_ number of > >> arguments, or it doesn't accept that many at all. > >> > > Camm> Its a 32bit wide call descriptor which has 6 bits each for > Camm> the maximum and minimum number of arguments, in addition to > Camm> type info for the first 6 arguments, return value info, etc. > > Just out of curiosity. Why do you need type info for the arguments? > Don't you pass around boxed objects and also return boxed objects? > Not always! GCL has been able to pass unboxed arguments for years as a performance feature. Makes things quite a bit more complicated as you can imagine. BTW, you saw the note about ensure-directories-exist? Take care, > Ray > > > _______________________________________________ > Gcl-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel > > > > -- Camm Maguire [email protected] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
