On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
G'day all.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 12:44:49AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Ah. Hmmm. Well, we're already attaching some metadata to ops in a
different way--that's what the op and inline keywords are doing. For
metadata that use parameters I
G'day all.
This patch allows op-writers to store optional metadata to be
associated along with an op. Very simple key-value stuff at the
moment; may get fancier later.
Once again, this is mostly for the optimizer's benefit, so you
can note things like if an op affects the state of the world,
At 1:04 PM +1000 4/19/02, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
This patch allows op-writers to store optional metadata to be
associated along with an op. Very simple key-value stuff at the
moment; may get fancier later.
Interesting. Could you give an example of how an op with metadata would look?
--
G'day all.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:31:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Interesting. Could you give an example of how an op with metadata would look?
Sure. Here's some of my experimenting with what is the right kind
of metadata to attach. Brief glossary:
- CANNOT_FALL_THROUGH
G'day all.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 12:44:49AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Ah. Hmmm. Well, we're already attaching some metadata to ops in a
different way--that's what the op and inline keywords are doing. For
metadata that use parameters I can see a scheme like you're
proposing, though
