On Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 08:46:05AM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
> Are the vtable ops supposed to be considered 'core' ops?
Yes. There will probably be other .ops files which make up core ops
too.
> I'm hoping this is just a temporary hack due to our lack of full platform
> support for dynamic
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 13:46:09 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Nah, using an I register as a host-machine-address for jumps doesn't argue
>for sizeof(INTVAL) >= sizeof(void *). Instead, it argues that the design
>that uses an int as an absolute address is wrong.
>
>I'm going to rewrite the docs and o
Jeff ---
> Rather wordy, I know, but it also points out how many places depend upon
> the name 'core' in the current code.
>
> I'm also posting a different version shortly that combines core.ops and
> vtable.ops into one core_ops.{c,h,pm}.
Are the vtable ops supposed to be considered 'core' ops?
