On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Simon Cozens wrote: > the right answer or the wrong answer. Once a language acknowledges that it is > dealing with pure, honest-to-God integers, then it is fairly easy to compile > down to integer-specific opcodes. I don't know when this situation ever happens in Perl 5.4... In Perl (5.4) you don't know what $a * $b does without looking at the value of $a and possibly also the value of $b. I'm not even talking of Ruby yet. ________________________________________________________________ Mathieu Bouchard http://hostname.2y.net/~matju
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Samuele Pedroni
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Guido van Rossum
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Paul Prescod
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Mathieu Bouchard
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Mathieu Bouchard
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Mathieu Bouchard
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Samuele Pedroni
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Kurt D. Starsinic
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Samuele Pedroni
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Samuele Pedroni
- Re: Anachronistic Acronyms in Parrot? Simon Cozens
