| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I just needed to adjust row-sizes when accessing the Registers table.
This commit dedicated to a fun hour on https://hn.town.siempre.io. Thanks
Cyrus!
(via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22818300)
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed and unsigned don't quite capture the essence of what the different
combinations of x86 flags are doing for SubX. The crucial distinction is
that one set of comparison operators is for integers and the second is
for addresses.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When I created it I was conflating two things:
a) needing to refer to just the start, rather than the whole, and
b) counting indirections.
Both are kinda ill-posed. Now Mu will have just `addr` and `handle` types.
Normal types will translate implicitly to `addr` types, while `handle`
will always require explicit handling.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Try to make the comments consistent with the type system we'll eventually
have.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Standardize conventions for labels within objects in the data segment.
We're going to use this in a new tool.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Support binary operations with reg/mem and reg operands.
Everything is passing. However, the self-hosting translator now generates
some discrepancies compared to the C++ translator :(
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Clean up pseudocode to match planned syntax for the type- and memory-safe
level-2 Mu language.
http://akkartik.name/post/mu-2019-2 is already out of date.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Replace calculations of constants with labels.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Thanks Andrew Owen for reporting this typo.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This undoes 5672 in favor of a new plan:
Layers 000 - 099 are for running without syntax sugar. We use them for
building syntax-sugar passes.
Layers 100 and up are for running with all syntax sugar.
The layers are arranged in approximate order so more phases rely on earlier
layers than later ones.
I plan to not use intermediate syntax sugar (just sigils without calls,
or sigils and calls without braces) anywhere except in the specific passes
implementing them.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Right now we always build the library before any apps.
Apps are where our syntax sugar translators (sigils, calls, braces) live.
So we can't use sugar in the standard library.
New idea: move all code for SubX phases into the top-level.
Perhaps we should also just build a single file rather than pipeline stages.
But for now we'll build each phase by building up to some specific layer.
This will simplify test_apps and move lots of one-off logic to a more standard
form in test_layers.
I'm also going to reorg existing layers so that we introduce each phase
at a point where it mostly only gets the helpers it needs.
This commit itself is just cleaning up some common strings. Using explicit
names for them streamlines binaries a bit.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Further flesh out next-word variant for calls.subx. All the code is
sketched out, and baseline tests pass. No tests yet for new
functionality compared to sigils.subx.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Translating common bits from sigils.subx expression-aware variant of
next-word to use sigils in calls.subx.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
We already support metadata after *(...)
No plans to support metadata _inside_ *(...)
|
| |
|
|
| |
The x86 instruction set carves out exceptions for these registers.
|
|
|
There's going to be multiple forms of syntax sugar going forward.
|