On Thursday, 1 June 2017 at 12:00:45 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
So why is the offset off by 14h (20 bytes)? It's not like we
need a to set a ptr first.
Go figure i probably found a bug...
Well as a side note a simple yet not happy workaround is making
a new array slice of the memory and then using that pointer
directly. Looking at the intel opcode and memory call
conventions, I could have used a very compact intel set and
scaling. Instead I'm forced to ignore scaling, and I'm also
forced to push/pop the flags to save the carry when advancing the
two pointers in parallel. Plus there's 3 instructions that don't
need to be there.
Yeah this is probably nitpicking... I can't help wanting to be
as optimized and small as possible.
