Hi guys,
On Thursday 09 June 2011 20:41:02 Alex wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 11:18:29AM +0200, Alexander Burger wrote: > > > Also - I find the general idea of using picolisp as an embedded control > > > language inside other applications interesting, not just this special > > > platform. > > > > So it would be nice to get pil32 or pil64 running. > > If you want to stick with miniPicoLisp, there is another idea: > > We can release the restriction that code must be aligned to certain byte > bondaries if you encode the function pointers differently. IIRC, the Amiga's instructions set guarantees that every function is 4-byte aligned anyway, on round 4-byte boundary, simply because every instruction is exactly 4 bytes (32bits). If that's the case, perhaps it could be enough to `fake' function addresses by adding `2' before exposing them to miniPicoLisp virtual machine; the address would get fix'd up by the current evSubr() macro before use anyway? That is, leave the evSubr() macro as-is, but instead adjust the way the function address is exposed to the mPL virtual machine. @Alex are all functions in miniPicoLisp aligned to 2-byte boundary on IA-32? Wouldn't that hamper performance -- as opposed to the preferred 4-byte alignment? Regards, -- dexen deVries ``One can't proceed from the informal to the formal by formal means.'' -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
