Re: Calling Func/Proc
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> CChris wrote:
>
> > I must look at this more carefully, but then there would be no performance
> > issue
> > in having a function return the last caller name/the whole list.
> >
> > As I said, I'd use it too.
> > Any objections? There must be some around <smile/>.
>
> + No performance hit
> + Enhancement is beneficial to programmers
>
> There better be no objections! :P
>
> Do it! Do it! Do it! :)
I had some eyestrain problems lately, keeping coding at a minimum this week.
Things look better now. I'd like to plug once for all a probable DC leak in
win32lib "Patch #67" so that I can send Derek (and the testers, remember?)what I
can consider beta-stage code for him to merge into his code base, ultimately
leading to a new public release of the lib. The consequence of the leak is the
slowing down of all graphic rendering.
When this is done, I'll look into the
<prospective doc entry>
s=function get_callers(i)
Returns a sequence of pairs of strings if /i/ is greater than or equal to 0.
The pairs are of the form {/routine name,file name/} and represent (part of) the
current list of callers of the routine being executed.
The first pair in the returned list, if any, shows the routine that directly
called the code being executed. The second pair shows the routine that called the
latter, and so on. If the list is empty, it means that your routine was called
from code outside of any routine, or that your statement is outside of any
routine itself.
If /i/ is greater than zero, the /i/ first calling routines are returned, or
less if there are less. If /i/ is 0, the whole list is returned. A value less
than 0 will trigger a run time error.
</prospective doc entry>
This introduces a new opcode in the IL spec, and causes many places to need
small modificattions (just like find_from()). As a result, it would appear in
v3.2 at the earliest if it ever does.
Any thoughts?
CChris
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
