On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 04:30:08PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 03:30 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> >definitely insert special opcodes only when asked for by a compiler
> >option. stuff like profiling, tracing, fine grained single step (op
> >code) debugging should be supported with s
At 03:30 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> PJ> Done by what? Adding opcodes at all conceivable positions could
> PJ> be unnecessarily expensive for most applications, and you're bound
> PJ> to miss something that someone wants.
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> well, i am sorta pushing for more work to be done on actually
>> implementing some early core stuff. i proposed work on the event system
>> even as a learning project to get a portable event system up in perl5.
DS> Cool--so... got
At 02:25 AM 7/9/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "PJ" == Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> how would you propose those callbacks be attached without op codes to do
> >> the callback? :)
>
> PJ> Well I was specifying requirements rather than proposing
> PJ> solutions, bu
At 09:58 PM 7/7/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "PJ" == Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> PJ> Some method of attaching a callback function to arbitrary opcodes would
> PJ> be very useful.
>
>how would you propose those callbacks be attached without op codes to do
>the callbac
