lexicals and globals assembly question

[Brian Wheeler]

I was just looking at store_lex, find_lex and store_global and
find_global and it seems like the operands are backwards for the store_*
versions. I thought the "rule" was that the destination is the leftmost
operand. Granted the string in question isn't really the destination,
but a global/lex of that name _is_.

So instead of
store_lex P0,'a'
find_lex P0,'a'
store_global P0,'b'
find_global P0,'b'

wouldn't it be better for it to be:

store_lex 'a',P0
find_lex P0,'a'
store_global 'b',P0
find_global P0,'b'

Thoughts?

Brian

[Steve Fink]

On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:17:22PM -0500, brian wheeler wrote:
>
> So instead of
> store_lex P0,'a'
> find_lex P0,'a'
> store_global P0,'b'
> find_global P0,'b'
>
> wouldn't it be better for it to be:
>
> store_lex 'a',P0
> find_lex P0,'a'
> store_global 'b',P0
> find_global P0,'b'
>
>
> Thoughts?

You've got my vote.

(I had the same reaction to an early version of the _lex stuff, but
didn't say anything because I had way too many unread messages at that
time.)

[Dan Sugalski]

I had it the original way, since the store ops didn't actually have
an explicit destination, though they probably ought to have a variant
that does. (For messing around in a particular pad/global level) It
felt nicely symmetric that way. I don't feel particularly strongly
either way, though

Anyone have strong feelings for the status quo? If not, lets change it.
--
Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
d...@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk