On Tue 27 Apr 2010 07:40, Jon Herron <jon.her...@yahoo.com> writes: > In some late night hacking this evening/morn I came across a question > in (language tree-il compile-glil) - should line 126 read ((return . 1) > . return) instead of ((return . 1) return)?
Indeed, it appears that way. I have fixed and pushed, thanks for the note! Return is a hack, though; I would rather express returns using prompt and abort, with some tree-il inliner logic to simplify some cases. But I was in a rush, so return is how it is. I'll be updating tree-il and vm docs to correspond to reality this weekend. Cheers, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
