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.

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 

dexen deVries

``One can't proceed from the informal to the formal by formal means.''
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to