Re: [PATCH] changing IV to opcode_t!!

[Jarkko Hietaniemi]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 06:47:38PM -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
> 
> Do we want the opcode to be so complicated? I thought we are
> going to use this kind of thing for generic pointers. The "p"
> member of opcode does not make any sense to me.

Alignment.

> Hong
> 
> > Earlier there was some discussion about changing typedef long IV
> > to
> > typedef union {
> >   IV i;
> >   void* p;
> > } opcode_t;

-- 
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
        # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
        # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen