[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gcl-devel] call-arguments-limit

From: Raymond Toy
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] call-arguments-limit
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:00:28 -0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.101 (Gnus v5.10.10) XEmacs/21.5-b33 (darwin)

>>>>> "Camm" == Camm Maguire <address@hidden> writes:

    Camm> Greetings!  Raymond Toy <address@hidden> writes:

    >>>>>>> "Camm" == Camm Maguire <address@hidden> writes:
    Camm> Greetings!  Henry Baker <address@hidden> writes:
    >> >> Does GCL use some sort of bit mask for argument lists?
    >> >>
    >> >> That's fine, but I'm having trouble understanding when a bit
    >> >> mask will be useful beyond -- e.g., 32 arguments.
    >> >>
    >> >> After than, either the function accepts _any_ number of
    >> >> arguments, or it doesn't accept that many at all.
    >> >>
    Camm> Its a 32bit wide call descriptor which has 6 bits each for
    Camm> the maximum and minimum number of arguments, in addition to
    Camm> type info for the first 6 arguments, return value info, etc.
    >> Just out of curiosity. Why do you need type info for the
    >> arguments?  Don't you pass around boxed objects and also return
    >> boxed objects?

    Camm> Not always!  GCL has been able to pass unboxed arguments for
    Camm> years as a performance feature.  Makes things quite a bit
    Camm> more complicated as you can imagine.

That is a nice feature.

    Camm> BTW, you saw the note about ensure-directories-exist?

No, I must have missed that. But if it's implemented, that's

There were a few other items on my wishlist but I can't remember them
now. They would be useful for maxima (and other CL code, of course).

BTW, I can't build on sparc. Do you care about that? It's less of a
concern for me since I can now build on linux and OSX easily now.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]