P1 = new PerlInt
P1 <- P2 + P3 # When you see "<-" instead of "=",
# You know that it's operating on
# an existing value, not just
# altering the contents of
# registers, as your experience
P0 = P1 # would suggest happens when
I0 = I1 + I2 # you use the "=" operator.
When I see <-, I think of processor user manuals, and there generally <- means "poke into a register"—exactly the opposite of what you want it to mean. But, in actuality, it'll also be used like memory[GPR1+GPR2] <- GPR3 or GPR3 <- memory[GPR1+GPR2], just less often, since loads and stores are much less common than register-to-register operations in most ISAs. But, in fact, <- means exactly the same thing that = does. Much like set and assign are synonyms.
If there's any need whatsoever to disambiguate the syntax, why make up new syntax? Why not use a syntax which is already familiar to every low-level programmer? How about this for the store (as in load/store) semantics:
*P1 = I1 + I2
—
Gordon Henriksen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
