At 11:18 PM -0500 12/31/02, David Robins wrote:
Ah, OK, that's different. :)On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:>I don't think any ops do that presently (that would take a PMC** param). Oh, sure, lots do. Remember the ops get a pointer to the PMC register, which is itself a pointer. Whatever you stuff in there is what the register is set to.Right, I meant PMC vtable, not ops.
Ripping out the rest of the stuff, this boils down to a matter of behaviour. What you're looking for is "perform operation and return value" semantics, while the vtables specify "perform operation and assign value" semantics. This is generally the more-likely to be used way, and we've gone with it for performance reasons.
In those cases where there is no destination of the assignment, you need to create an empty PMC of the appropriate type, or something that can become the appropriate type, and pass it into the vtable method.
This also brings up some issues of object behaviour, which I think I need to specify better, so I will in a more appropriately titled mail message. :)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
