Re: increment shorthand
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: increment shorthand
- From: Sven Olsen <sven2718@...>
- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:19:01 -0700
(Looks like it is possible to replace my original kludge with an even uglier one, fixing the bug. More specifically, if I keep track of the top of the stack prior to reading the lvalue, I can use it to figure out how many registers to reserve, thus avoiding register overwriting problems when I construct the rvalue. I have only the fuzziest understanding of why this approach works though.)
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Sven Olsen
<sven2718@gmail.com> wrote:
Hrm, well, I've found a bug in my own patch, so, maybe porting Ian's code to 5.2 would be a better option.
It's possible to create situations where my register kludge fails, for example:
local t={a="b"}
local r={a={b=2}}
r.a[t.a]+=2
-Sven