I pretty sure it hasn't made it in, I think I would have spotted it
since I've been anxious about it.
I'd really like to get a couple of simple directives in soon,
the primary one being (.method|.sub)
This one would be useful for the not yet existent optimizer
and verification code, if we required bsr jump addresses
to be declared with the the directive rather than a label.
Its also a heck of a lot easier to read.
-Melvin Smith
IBM :: Atlanta Innovation Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :: 770-835-6984
Steve Fink
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
04/05/2002 01:57 Subject: Re: key patch?
PM
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 01:47:33PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:43 AM -0800 4/5/02, Steve Fink wrote:
> >The next step would probably be to decide which assembler we're going
> >forward with (the existing or Simon's new one), since I at least am
> >hesitant to patch anything that may or may not be used.
>
> Simon's is what we're going with.
> --
Good, since that's the one I've been patching locally. :-) It hasn't
been committed yet, has it? (If I weren't so lazy, I'd check...)
