On Tuesday 19 November 2002 11:54, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Daniel Grunblatt wrote: > > > The problem is when you want to implement an opcode like div, which is > > easy in ppc but not in arm.... ideas? > > I don't know arm, but this belongs to jit_emit.h, how it's done there is > a different issue. >
what if we just don't want to implement that opcode in this specific architecture? > But can we have a united syntax for {c,r}isc.jit. The problem currently > is, that moves or other ops are sometimes written as op(src, dest), > sometimes exactly the other way round. > > I really want this have sorted out. I'm currently writing tests > (jit/i386 is failing a lot of them, due to wrong move directions: e.g. > add_i_i_i, sub_i_i_i) > > >>Proposed naming of ops: > >> > >> jit_emit_<op>_<rmi>_<in>(...) > >> > >> <op> operations mov, add, sub, mul, ... > >> <rmi> register, memory, immediate, for all parameters > >> (source, dest) or (source, source, dest) <rmid> register, memory, immediate, displacement > > We could do it like parrot (dest, src, src) too, but I want really a > unique naming convention. > > leo Cool, let's do it like parrot. I just committed a renaming for the ppc. I believe that Parrot_end will have to call jit_emit_end() that will reside in jit_emit.h and will be just like Parrot_end is now since every calling convention is different. Daniel Grunblatt.