At 09:39 AM 1/2/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>Is it 'incorrect' to build Parrot with ints that are bigger than opcodes?
No.
>My 'some 64-bitness' build is generating warnings and failing tests
>because of the pointer mismatch (long * vs long long *) between INTVAL and
>opcode_t.
This probably is an artifact from when opcodes were plain intvals.
>Also, just out of curiosity, why is it INTVAL and opcode_t, rather than
>intval_t+opcode_t or INTVAL+OPCODE?
Good question. opcode_t is really a type, while INTVAL's just a standin for
long. They probably ought to be regularized, but there's always that pesky
question of "which way".
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
