Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Folks, > I've added in the infrastructure needed to implement fixed opcode numbers. > There's now a file ops.num that holds the opcode name/number pairs for all > ops with a fixed number.
I don't know yet, what are the goals of this patch. There is not any sign in the list, that ops should be numbered like that and so on ... WTF Second, you for sure did ignore all comments in core.ops and my summaries, how various things are *working* now. This patch breaks all predereferenced cores as well as dynamic opcode libraries at first sight. If you don't have really *very* strong arguments for this patch then please just undo it - now - thanks. > Dan leo
