RE: An overview of the Parrot interpreter

[Dan Sugalski]

At 01:58 PM 9/4/2001 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
>From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > At 10:32 AM 9/4/2001 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > > > * Methods get their parameters passed in as a list in
> > > > * PMC register 0, unless we can unambiguously figure
> > > > * out their prototype at compilation time
> > >
> > >Will the subroutine know how it was called? (ie: Through method
> > >dispatch or through straightforward symbol table lookup. I'm really
> > >hoping the answer to this is 'yes'.) Or will methods and subroutines
> > >be distinct now?
> >
> > I suppose we could, and I don't know.
> >
> > Can you see any use of a sub knowing it was called via a method call?
>
>So that attributes which cause code to be executed before or after a
>subroutine implementation's execution might behave differently depending on
>whether the sub were executed as a function or a method?

Okay. I'll see about finding a spot to squirrel away call type somewhere.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk