All --
BTW, Here are some things to consider:
* The recognition of register types means that you can't use labels
like 'I4'. It would be nice if registers and labels were in
different namespaces.
Could label definitions be like this: "FOO:", and label uses
be like this: ":FOO"? (or is that too strange for public
consumption?)
* I put a hack in there to deal with the constant-ification of
strings. If you look closely, you'll see that I changed the
mapping from string --> integer to string --> "$x", where x
is an integer. Then, I use the leading '$' to mean "Hey! this
number that follows is part of the constant pool!" (kind of
like a new type of pseudo register, I suppose). I strip that
'$' back off again, though before passing control on to the
existing code that does all the packing, etc., since it
doesn't expect the '$'.
I wonder if there is anything interesting to be done w.r.t.
named constants in explicit constant pools? For example,
set S4, $FOO
...
__CONST__
FOO: "Bar"
What do folks think about named registers?
reg I1, $M
...
set $M, 4
Regards,
-- Gregor
_____________________________________________________________________
/ perl -e 'srand(-2091643526); print chr rand 90 for (0..4)' \
Gregor N. Purdy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Focus Research, Inc. http://www.focusresearch.com/
8080 Beckett Center Drive #203 513-860-3570 vox
West Chester, OH 45069 513-860-3579 fax
\_____________________________________________________________________/
