On 21/01/2014 21:28, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Am 20.01.2014 01:18, schrieb Martin:
It used
(taicpu(p).oper[1]^.reg<>taicpu(hp1).oper[0]^^.ref^.base) and
(taicpu(p).oper[1]^.reg<>taicpu(hp1).oper[0]^^.ref^.index) then
but should only compare the supregister part
I replaced that
not(RegInOp(getsupreg(taicpu(p).oper[1]^.reg),taicpu(hp1).oper[0]^)) then
uncommented, and tested.
It does catch a big lot of occurrences.
Can you post some example code? It might be worth to think about
improving this already in at the node level.
I will try to find some. (I just enabled it, and put a writeln in there,
to see, if it was triggered. Then run the tests and buli Lazarus.
In the meantime, what about the other additions/changes?
I already wrote code for them, and mailed it.
So what I need to know: How to best go on to get them accepted and into
the compiler?
One problem is, if I create 3 or 4 patches, and report them, only one
will work. The others may then conflict. Or I need to create them, based
on each other, and only applicable in the right order.
I can do all in one (if that is preferred)...
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
