Simon Glover wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > >>At 7:42 PM -0700 10/8/02, Steve Fink wrote: >> >>>Thanks, applied. >>> >>>Who came up with the idea of two-argument ne, anyway? That's kind of >>>bizarre. >>> >> >>Definitely bizarre. I think I'd rather not have it, it doesn't make much sense. >> > > Easily done. Patch below removes the ops, plus the relevent tests from > integer.t and number.t
There are also 2 operand =item B<eq>(in INT, in INT) equivalents - toss them, my 2 � There are also 2 operand math operations of dubious achievement: 5 add 2 sub 4 mul 1 div 2 mod Each of them will be doubled for each RHS INT argument giving ~25 opcodes. I would kill these too. IMHO a smaller core will perform better, then the above saving of 1 operand in the byte code can achieve. leo
