[m-rev.] for review: TYPE_CTOR_REP_REFERENCE

[Zoltan Somogyi]

On 10-Feb-2003, Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> Zoltan, what is the semantics of the first argument to return_unify_answer()?
> (See the XXX at the end of this diff.  Did I get it right?)

Not quite.

There is a row of definitions of the form

	MR_define_unify_compare_proc_statics(xxx);

in mercury_ho_call.c. The first argument of return_unify_answer is supposed
to correspond to one of the xxx, identifying the kind of thing you are
unifying. You should add MR_define_unify_compare_proc_statics(ref) to the
block of MR_define_unify_compare_proc_statics, and a corresponding call
in write_out_proc_statics.

Apart from that, the change is fine.

Zoltan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------