On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:22, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> This looks pretty good. But why are we bothering to keep $prolog at all any
> more, if all we're going to pass it is &PL_sv_no all the time? Maybe we'll
> have a use for it in the future, but right now we don't appear to unless I'm
> missing something.
I don't see any reason to keep it around.