| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
More tracing reorg.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Clean up trace levels everywhere in SubX.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Now it will pass labels straight through.
But we may get more confusing error messages in later passes in some
situations.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Key core data structures by hex bytes in text rather than opcode
numbers. Saves us round trips of having to parse and reparse strings,
and also allows us to more easily ignore unexpected non-hex words in
each transform. We'll use this ability next when we start inserting
labels.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Good idea from @tekknolagi: make more explicit that the first segment is
code.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Was confusing having numbers without an explicit base sometimes be hex
and sometimes not, based on their metadata.
By convention I don't bother with the '0x' for instructions, or for
single-digit numbers that are equal to their decimal representation. But
I could and it would still work.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
We don't have any supported 3-byte opcodes at the moment.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This ports commit 4421 to the subx/ program.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Better name for a layer.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Clean up format of example programs.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Silence some messages to the console. Fixes #12.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Unshadow variable. Thanks Max Bernstein for pointing this out.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
To see traces on stdout, set the global `Dump_trace` to true.
Thanks Max Bernstein for the feedback.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is a large patch, and there's a few things wrong with it:
a) Helpers are incredibly messy. I want to use has_metadata in layer 24,
but can't since it also does error checking. There must be a better
basis set of primitives for managing metadata.
b) Layer 22 introduces operands for checking, but programs with operands
don't actually run until layer 24. So I can't write non-error scenarios
in layer 22. That seems ugly. But if I try to introduce layer 24 first
there's nothing left to check after it.
I *could* play tricks with ordering layers vs transforms. Mu does that a
bit, but it becomes hard to mess with, so I'm trying to avoid that. My
current plan is for layers within an "abstraction level" to be run in
order. Higher layers will necessarily need to come before lower ones.
But hopefully this level of hierarchy will help manage the chaos.
c) The check for whether an instruction is all hex bytes makes me
nervous. I do want to check that an instruction that's just:
cd
tells the programmer that an operand is missing. The check I currently
have is likely not perfectly correct.
I *could* put layer 25 in its own commit. But I guess I'm not doing
that now.
We have a new example program: hello world!
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Never mind, let's drop unused/vestigial altogether. Use absence of names
to signal unused arguments.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Drop names of unused arguments.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Port commit 4235 to subx.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Temporarily delete support for /imm tags. We'll bring it back
momentarily in a totally different way.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Word-wrap online help.
Fixes #8.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Fixes #9.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Couple of improvements for the tangle/ directory:
a) Start running tangle unit tests at build time again.
b) Option to print out test names as they run, just like in top-level.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Thanks Max Bernstein. Fixes #7.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I accidentally published commit 4387, which is broken; most example
files are untranslateable.
I spent a while trying to push on through, but packing operands
correctly into bytes has been surprisingly difficult. Fixing the repo
without further delay.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Fix ex4 binary, which has been corrupted in the repo since commit 4356.
In this time it hasn't changed further. The correct version added here
is also the file that should have been committed then.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Why did I have this?
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|