Re: [Pnet-developers] Porting work remaining question

[Gopal V]

Hi,

> Porting that to the 400 seems an issue given the
> requirement
> (according to it's setjmp_t test prog) for an
> assembler version
> of GC_push_regs. The 400 doesn't provide access to
> native
> machine code hence no register access.

Hmm.. I've no idea , I did think that MI-whatever
allows you to work like native code.

> I've posted a question to the gc mailing list, but
> has there been
> any in-depth experience with libgc in the pnet world
> or has it
> simply been a case of plug it in and watch it go?

Mostly plug it in and all that - only tum has fixed
bugs in libgc, IIRC . It's been picked from gcj and 
used as such.

Gopal


                
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com