[retroforth] Re: RetroForth 7.6 Development
- From: Stefan Schmiedl <s@xxxxxx>
- To: retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:51:59 +0100
Charles Childers (2004-11-25 10:07):
> ...arguments... number-of-arguments functionname invoke
This one, please. It's the most convenient to use and a
little bit more readable than the next alternative.
>
> or
>
> ...arguments... functionname number-of-arguments invoke
>
> Either of these would simplify writing wrappers (no need to juggle the
> stacks when a function takes many arguments). It'd make the
> invoke/cinvoke functions trivially more complex (maybe one or two more
> lines). What do you think about the questions and this change?
if you don't provide the stack juggling in the kernel, every single
rf programmer has to define it himself ....
looking forward to 7.6
s.
--
Stefan Schmiedl
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
|Approximity GmbH | EDV-Beratung Schmiedl |
|http://www.approximity.com | Am Bräuweiher 4, 93499 Zandt, Germany |
|mailto:stefan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | Tel. (09944) 3068-98, Fax -97 |
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
Other related posts:
