At 10:39 PM -0400 7/3/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>At 09:51 PM 7/3/2002 -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>>I know there was some talk about this extra "address" parameter recently,
>>but i'm not sure what the upshot of it is. Right now, tcc is complaining
>>loudly because the init functions for parrotsub and parrotcoroutine don't
>>match the init_method_t type in the _vtable structure.
>>
>>What's the deal here?
>
>I made the PMC init method take an int argument sometime around
>January, and at the time we agreed it would be useful to have polymorphic
>constructors. Then it sort of silently got removed.
Not quite silently, but yeah, pretty close. It got yanked because,
while they address a real problem (and one I missed) an int's not
quite up to the task. I'm not sure what is--I'm thinking property
hashes, but they seem pretty heavyweight.
I like passing in init a parameter. We just need more than an int. :(
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
