On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
> Florian La Roche:
> > Please do not apply the change for jit/i386/core.jit. The current code
> > looks bogus to make a "jmp()". Funny thing is leaving that code away
> > does not work, but that "cmp/jne" code seems to make some examples
> > work. Probably "JUMP" is completely wrong here??
>
> > --- jit/i386/core.jit
> > +++ jit/i386/core.jit
> > @@ -83,7 +83,9 @@ Parrot_if_i_ic {
> > }
> >
> > Parrot_branch_ic {
> > - jmp ($0x0)
> > + cmp %eax,%eax
> > + jne ($0x0)
> > +; jmp ($0x0)
> > JUMP(INT_CONST[1])
> > }
>
> Daniel, any comment here?
It's obviously the as/objdump problem, I didn't solve it yet because Jason
Gloudon is working on a different jit model that might be better.
>
> --
> Um. There is no David conspiracy. Definitely not. No Kate conspiracy either.
> No. No, there is definitely not any sort of David conspiracy, and we are
> definitely *not* in league with the Kate conspiracy. Who doesn't exist. And
> nor does the David conspiracy. No. No conspiracies here. - Thorfinn, ASR
>
