At 12:30 PM -0700 10/25/02, Brent Dax wrote:
Whoever's writing the bytecode file needs to deal with that--hopefully there's only one writer. I'm in the middle of getting the API down on electrons, so we should have something to savage reasonably soon.Dan Sugalski: # I'm thinking something else, actually. Names made perfect sense # except for encoding info and duplication. We can put limits on the # name encoding if we want, but... really, who cares? It's only useful # for introspection purposes and while that's certainly important, I'm # not sure it's worth much hassle. # # Instead, lets just give an entry number. We can have arbitrary data # chunk #1, #2, #3, and so on. I'm not sure it'll buy us much having # names attached.What happens if two tools (say, a custom debugger and the Perl compiler) both use the same segment number for something? Names make collisions less likely.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
