[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX
From: |
Juanma Barranquero |
Subject: |
Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 18:04:23 +0200 |
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 17:48:01 +0200, Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> wrote:
> It is also an index into the specpdl array.
Well, yeah, you're right. This is C we're talking 'bout, after all :)
Anyway, the switch to SPECPDL_INDEX is now done. Changing the variables
(count, speccount, speccount1, post_read_count, count1 and specpdl_count)
to use a single name seems sensible. I'll do it a bit at a time.
I'll use specpdl_top, if no one opposes it.
/L/e/k/t/u
- BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Richard Stallman, 2002/07/09
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/10
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Stefan Monnier, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Stefan Monnier, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/12
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Richard Stallman, 2002/07/12
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12