On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Juan Vuletich <
juan@jvuletich.org <mailto:
juan@jvuletich.org>> wrote:
� �Hi Eliot,
� �There are several other changes in that package that could
� �generate different behavior. Are they correct? They are:
� �BlockClosure >> value
� � �used to call primitive 201, now calls 205
� � �used to check for zero args, now checks for one (!?)
� �BlockClosure >> value:
� � �used to call primitive 202, now calls 205
� �BlockClosure >> value:value:
� � �used to call primitive 203, now calls 205
� �BlockClosure >> value:value:value:
� � �used to call primitive 204, now calls 205
� �Primitive 205 was previously only used for
� �#value:value:value:value:, so I wonder if this might be a mistake.
Quite right, this is a mistake. �I was careless copy-pasting the fix between them. �I've committed fixes to trunk. �In the VM these primitive numbers all bind to the same primitive so there was no visible effect. �Thanks for checking!
best
Eliot