On 21/06/14 06:26 PM, comex wrote: > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Daniel Micay <danielmi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It's not possible to add new instructions to x86_64 that are not large >> and hard to decode. It's too late, nothing short of breaking backwards >> compatibility by introducing a new architecture will provide trapping on >> overflow without a performance hit. To repeat what I said elsewhere, >> Rust's baseline would still be obsolete if it failed on overflow because >> there's no indication that we can sanely / portably implement failure on >> overflow via trapping. It's certainly not possible in LLVM right now. > > Er... since when? Many single-byte opcodes in x86-64 corresponding to > deprecated x86 instructions are currently undefined.
http://ref.x86asm.net/coder64.html I don't see enough gaps here for the necessary instructions.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
