At 10:55 AM 9/10/2001 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
> > At 06:26 PM 9/9/2001 -0700, Wizard wrote:
> > >into something using a processor op equivalent to the 8051C
> > > testbit( byte_variable, bit_offset).
> >
> > This is pretty much
> >
> > testbit I0, 6
> >
> > to test whether bit 6 is set i I0, right?
>
>What is the difference from
>
> and I0, I0, (1 << 6)
Well, I took a shortcut, it'd probably be:
testbit I0, 6, SOME_LABEL_TO_JUMP_TO_IF_THE_BIT_IS_SET
But I was posting mainly to get some clarification as to what Grant was
talking about.
>Unless if we want Parrot to handle multi-media data, there is
>not reasons to introduce many bitops (such as rotate, leading
>zeros, trailing zeros).
At the moment I tend to agree, but since perl has some bitwise operations
we need to support at least those.
I expect the bit ops will probably get consigned to a loadable library the
same way that the transcendental ops will be, in which case it doesn't hurt
to define a bunch for now since they won't get in the way.
Besides, they are, if properly defined, useful. And they have the advantage
that one or two people can split off to do them as they think necessary, so
we can have another semi-independent development project. I don't want one
or two people (Namely me... :) to be holding up development that other
folks could be doing.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
