At 10:32 PM 9/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Monday 03 September 2001 10:27 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > >To me, that seems only a language decision. This could certainly handle
> > >that.
> >
> > Ah, but calling in the first way has two PMCs in as parameters, while the
> > second has only one. Potentially at least. A world of difference there.
>
>A single PMC? (A list of pointers to PMCs?)
>
>Or, to think of it another way, how are you going to pass two scalars, or an
>array of two scalars, to a sub with *no* prototype?
We create a list, stuff our bits into the list, and pass the list. @_ will
point to the list.
Lists can access their contents as if they were a list of scalars even if
they're not. (So we can avoid flattening in cases we don't need to)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
