On 06/17/2010 12:40 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> + /* Handle the modifiers. */
>> + if (ct & TCG_CT_CONST_NEG) {
>> + val = -val;
>> + }
>
> This "modifier" is only used by subi. Wouldn't it be better to use a
> TCG_CT_CONST_SUBI instead?Not really. This negation needs to happen *before* the sign-extension of TCG_CT_CONST_32 in order to get correct results. While I could do a CONST_SUBI, I would have to handle CONST_32 again within the CONST_SUBI clause and I would not consider that better. r~
