Peter Vreman wrote: >>I have some questions regarding porting of FPC to another machine type. >>One of the things I am considering doing is the "pushing" of more of the >>code processing onto the assembler, and whether this might be a better >>idea, or if it was thought about and rejected for some reasons and it >>might be worth noting if it was thought about. >> >>For example, I am thinking that code such as >> >> if xray = 5 then >> do_something >> else >> do_something_else; >> >>Where 'do_something' and 'do_something_else' could be one line or a >>BEGIN / END block. This could, with use of a good macro assembler, be >>handled as something like >> >> IF XRAY,EQ,F5 >> do_something ; code as >>generated >> ELSE >> do_something_else ; more code >> ENDIF >> >>F5 DC F'5' Constant >>defined >> >>Now, the idea is the IF, ELSE and ENDIF macros will handle the creation >>of the particular code for testing and such. >> >>There are a number of (already written) macros available to do this, and >>I think it will reduce the complexity of the compiler (at a slight >>increase in complexity of the generated code via macros) . I am >>wondering if there are any thoughts on this idea. > > > This is not possible with fpc. The compiler is made to generate the > instructions itself in a list. See cgobj.pas and cgcpu.pas what is > required for a new processor.
Preferably arm and sparc because they are the easiest. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
