Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
Michael --
I had more time to think about it, and I determined how a compute op-code
could be efficient.
[snip]
You wicked, wicked person! :)
I'd like to see some benchmarks on that one vs. the most efficient
possible hand-coded separate ops for moderate to
All --
I've created a varargs-ish example by making a new op, print_s_v.
This is pretty rough, and I haven't updated the assembler, but it
seems to work.
Um.. I *have* updated the assembler. Its the *dis*assembler I haven't
updated. This is what happens:
* *_v ops list their number of
All --
I've created a varargs-ish example by making a new op, print_s_v.
This is pretty rough, and I haven't updated the assembler, but it
seems to work.
Um.. I *have* updated the assembler. Its the *dis*assembler I haven't
updated. This is what happens:
* *_v ops list their number
Michael Maraist wrote:
All --
I've created a varargs-ish example by making a new op, print_s_v.
This is pretty rough, and I haven't updated the assembler, but it
seems to work.
With var-args, we could produce highly efficient SIMD instructions.
printf obviously, multi-push/pop,
At 06:59 PM 9/25/2001 -0400, Michael L Maraist wrote:
I've created a varargs-ish example by making a new op, print_s_v.
This is pretty rough, and I haven't updated the assembler, but it
seems to work.
Okay, I've been off the air all day (Sorry 'bout that--cable got nuked) so
I
Michael --
I had more time to think about it, and I determined how a compute op-code
could be efficient.
[snip]
You wicked, wicked person! :)
I'd like to see some benchmarks on that one vs. the most efficient
possible hand-coded separate ops for moderate to complex arithmetic...
These
is it possible the ops to handle variable number of arguments, what I have
in mind :
print I1,,,N2,\n
This should be done by create array opcode plus print array opcode.
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The create array opcode takes n top of stack (or n of registers)
and create an array out of it. Both
is it possible the ops to handle variable number of arguments, what I have
in mind :
print I1,,,N2,\n
This should be done by create array opcode plus print array opcode.
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
I have a minor issue with a proliferation of createArray. In perl5 we
used the Stack for just
At 01:03 PM 9/24/2001 -0400, Michael Maraist wrote:
is it possible the ops to handle variable number of arguments, what I
have
in mind :
print I1,,,N2,\n
This should be done by create array opcode plus print array opcode.
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
I have a minor issue with a
I have a minor issue with a proliferation of createArray. In perl5 we
used the Stack for just about everything minus physically setting @x =
(1,2,3). The creation of a dynamic array is a memory hog.
Less of a hog in many ways than using a stack. Worth the times when it's not.
I don't
All --
I've created a varargs-ish example by making a new op, print_s_v.
This is pretty rough, and I haven't updated the assembler, but it
seems to work.
I'm attaching a patch, and a test program (pt.pasm).
Enjoy!
-- Gregor
At 07:09 PM 9/22/2001 +0300, raptor wrote:
hi,
is it possible the ops to handle variable number of arguments
No.
Which isn't to say that if you do:
new P0, list
push P0, A
push P0, multipart
push P0, string
push P0, \n
print P0
you won't get A multipart string out,
On Sat, 22 Sep 2001, raptor wrote:
hi,
is it possible the ops to handle variable number of arguments, what I have
in mind :
print I1,,,N2,\n
This could probably be done as a macro when the assembler has macro
support in the future.
For now, the Jako Compiler converts:
var int i;
13 matches
Mail list logo
