Eliot Miranda uploaded a new version of Compiler to project The Trunk:
http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Compiler-eem.323.mcz ==================== Summary ==================== Name: Compiler-eem.323 Author: eem Time: 7 July 2016, 11:27:28.886558 am UUID: 52466c66-954e-47f9-8c43-2ce094580ab4 Ancestors: Compiler-eem.322 Comment bytecode 139 as the callPrimitive bytecode (Spur mandates this to lift the number of literals). =============== Diff against Compiler-eem.322 =============== Item was changed: EncoderForV3 subclass: #EncoderForV3PlusClosures instanceVariableNames: '' classVariableNames: '' poolDictionaries: '' category: 'Compiler-Kernel'! + !EncoderForV3PlusClosures commentStamp: 'eem 2/29/2016 00:07' prior: 0! - !EncoderForV3PlusClosures commentStamp: '<historical>' prior: 0! An encoder for the V3 bytecode set augmented with the following bytecodes that are part of the full closure implementation. 138 10001010 jkkkkkkk Push (Array new: kkkkkkk) (j = 0) or Pop kkkkkkk elements into: (Array new: kkkkkkk) (j = 1) + 139 10001011 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Invoke primitive number jjjjjjjjkkkkkkkk - 140 10001100 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Push Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj 141 10001101 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Store Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj 142 10001110 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Pop and Store Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj 143 10001111 llllkkkk jjjjjjjj iiiiiiii Push Closure Num Copied llll Num Args kkkk BlockSize jjjjjjjjiiiiiiii This is an exact duplicate of EncoderForLongFormV3PlusClosures. Could be a trait (or in Newspeak, a Mixin). For now we impose upon you to synchronise any and all changes between these two classes.! |
+ 139 10001011 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Invoke primitive number jjjjjjjjkkkkkkkk Why is the primitive index in bytecode 139 stored little-endian? The other bytecodes with immediate args > 8 bits are in big endian (e.g. push closure copy) - Bert - |
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
No reason beyond my habit and preference. _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:
Can we still fix it? It seems really weird to me to have two different conventions in one bytecode set. - Bert - |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |