Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) The assembler and PIR compiler need to be taught appropriate
transforms
Any objections if I handled unary opcodes with constant arguments inside
IMCC? We have still opcodes like:
sin_n_nc# sin Nx, 3.14
The created code would be
set Nx,
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... The answer isn't to reduce the op count. The
answer's to make the cores manageable, which doesn't require tossing
ops out.
It seems that it was a bit unclear what my patches did. The confusion
seem to arise from the usage of the term opcode. I used it
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4) A scheme for calling functions.
a) we need a class for a namespace, e.g. the interpreter (Python might
have a math object for the call below:)
$P0 = getinterp
b) we do a method call
$N0 = $P0.sin(3.14)
c) add a method to
[Snip]
This is interesting. After we're functionally complete we can revisit it.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy
At 9:20 AM +0100 11/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Too many opcodes
Bluntly, no. Not too many opcodes.
This has been an ongoing issue. I'm well aware that you want to to
trim down the opcode count for ages and replace a lot of them with
functions with a lightweight calling convention. Well, we
At 8:46 PM -0500 11/29/04, Dan Sugalski wrote:
It requires being somewhat careful with what ops we put *in*.
And since I wasn't clear (This stuff always obviously makes little
sense only after I send things...), I meant in the switch/cgoto/jit
core loop, not what ops are actually ops.
--
Dan
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3) Function-like opcodes
Stat, gmtime, seek, tell, send, poll, recv, gcd, lcm, pack, rand,
split, sleep, and what not are all functions in C or perl and any
other language I know. These are *not* opcodes in any hardware CPU I
know (maybe VAXens have
Below are some considerations WRT current opcode count.
leo
Too many opcodes
gcc 2.95.4 doesn't compile the switch core optimized. People have
repeatedly reported about troubles with the CGoto core - now the CGP
core is as big and compiles as slow.
I'm not speaking of the pain
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 09:20:42AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
2) Opcode variants with mixed arguments
Honestly
acos Nx, Iy
and tons of other such opcodes are just overkill.
Heck, why do we even have transcendental maths ops that take integer
