Luke said:
> Plus, parameters to functions are likely to be used
> in the code of the
> function (and likewise with return values), so we're
> just skipping
> unloading the array into registers.
OK. That makes sense, but my problem is:
in the case that the called function *does* treat its
parameter list as an array, it's going to have to have
some ugly code:
(pretend this is some kinda pseudo-imcc)
sub print
if numparams >= 1
print P5
end
if numparams >= 2
print P6
end
if numparams >= 3
print P7
end
...whole bunch of checks and prints...
if numparams >= 16
for p in P4
print p
end
end
end
maybe this kind of unprototyped function is expected
to be uncommon enough that we can put up with having
to emit code like the above... But unless people are
really sure this is the way to go, it seems to me that
we ought to be able to do better :-S Perhaps there
could be a set of opcodes that allow called functions
to treat the parameter list as a single array? That
might be the best of both worlds. Kind of like the
save_top op saving your code from 16 save operations.
Except more important :-P
sub print
load_params P0 # all your parameters are now in $P0
for p in P0
print p
end
end
Anyway, yeah. My ConfigScript interpreter would like
that. ;-)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
