Re: pdd21 vs. find_global

2006-07-08 Thread Chip Salzenberg
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 10:37:59PM -0500, Allison Randal wrote: > I'm more inclined to say find_global just shouldn't accept a namespace PMC > as an argument. For those who aren't reading the subversion logs: 1. Why aren't you? :-) 2. I've done this -- Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: pdd21 vs. find_global

2006-07-03 Thread Allison Randal
Patrick R. Michaud wrote: you change to $P99 = get_namespace key_or_array $P0 = $P99['foo'] which also incidentally encourages(!) compilers to cache namespace pointers. Ooh. I like it very much! Okay, to flesh this out as a viable alternative, Chip/Patrick we need: a) a standard

Re: pdd21 vs. find_global

2006-07-02 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 05:10:59PM -0500, Chip Salzenberg wrote: > Darn, find_global has collided with pdd21. > > Currently find_global is prepared to accept a key or a namespace, and > distinguishing namespaces from arrays is starting to get just a little > too polymorphic for an opcode. Agreed.

Re: pdd21 vs. find_global

2006-07-01 Thread Allison Randal
Chip Salzenberg wrote: Darn, find_global has collided with pdd21. Currently find_global is prepared to accept a key or a namespace, and distinguishing namespaces from arrays is starting to get just a little too polymorphic for an opcode. I'm thinking that between get_namespace and the untyped n

pdd21 vs. find_global

2006-07-01 Thread Chip Salzenberg
Darn, find_global has collided with pdd21. Currently find_global is prepared to accept a key or a namespace, and distinguishing namespaces from arrays is starting to get just a little too polymorphic for an opcode. I'm thinking that between get_namespace and the untyped namespace interface, find_