http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/Tools/I18N/LJ-I18N.html is a fine paper
on the need for and challenges involved in I18N and L10N support.
--
\let\l\let\l\d\def\l\a\active\l~\catcode~`?\a~`;\a\d;{~`};!\a\d!{?;~}\l?\the;#
!;]!\l]\l;\.!;,!;\%!;=!]=\d],\expandafter;[!][{=%{\message[};\$!=${\uccode`
This belongs on -internals. The threading model will probably be
identical for all ports.
And my suspicion is that -internals will use whatever the platform
provides.
I don't think we want to write a portable threading capability.
> "SWM" == Steven W McDougall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
/--- On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 06:19:43PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
| I don't think you should even attempt to version/transaction
| protect
| a tied variable. Anything that leaves the memory or could leave
| the
| memory (e.g. socket write) should probably not be versioned.
|
| Unles
Simon Cozens wrote:
> Currently, SvPVX(foo) requires one lookup
No lookups at all -- SvPVX(foo) is just a pointer offset, i.e. an add.
> with a vtable, it would necessitate two, (One to find the functino in "foo",
> and then the functino must find the data in "foo")
It would probably work somet
Sam Tregar wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Graham Barr wrote:
> > So it is a security issue then as it needs somewhere to cache these
> > object files, and anyone must be able to do it.
>
> The place it stores its objects is configurable, so it's only a security
> problem if you make it one! I'
