Re: [PATCH] Bytecode bounds checking and TRACE_OPS

[Dan Sugalski]

At 11:02 AM 9/17/2001 -0400, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
>Dan --
> > Also, we're trying to keep the stuff in the loop to a minimum, so for this
> > I'd rather have a separate runops function, as well as having the actual
> > funky stuff in the body separated out. (I'd really like it abstracted out
> > into a generic debugging runops, but we can do that later)
>
>So, shall I make a runops_trace() function and modify test_prog to run
>that if it is passed an approproate --trace (or something) flag?

Yup. Just checked in a new interpreter.h with an interpreter flags field 
and some defined bits. Go ahead and use those. (flags != 0 means we need to 
check, FWIW)


                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk