01:48
ilbot3 joined
05:49
brrt joined
06:09
brrt joined
06:17
domidumont joined
06:21
domidumont joined
|
|||
brrt | good * | 06:25 | |
yesterday when i couldn't sleep i figured out a solution to my issue | |||
i'm not sure if you are going to laugh or cry, because it is the same solution as the others | |||
nevertheless | |||
it does have the twin advantages of being robust (well, a bit more robust anyway) and simple | 06:26 | ||
we do assign a ordering number to the tiles-that-are-to-be-inserted | 06:27 | ||
however, we do this explicitly | |||
and with just relative meaning | 06:28 | ||
e.g. | |||
suppose we find that we must spill a register to load a value | |||
we must do three things | |||
a): find the register | |||
b): find a place in the bytecode stream to spill it (by default just after its creation) | 06:29 | ||
c): find a place in the bytecode strema to insert the load (by default just before its use) | |||
if the place of b) and c) is the same, first insert the spill, and assign it relative order nr $x; then insert the load, and assign it relative order nr $x + 1 | 06:30 | ||
this way i can always ensure that pairs of inserted tiles have a relative order, and they also have a relative order to tiles that are already present in the bytecode stream | 06:31 | ||
bytecode stream ~~ tile list, in this case | |||
so yes, i'm faced with difficulty, and i just pick another integer | |||
in this case, explicit integers are better than implicit | 06:32 | ||
07:05
brrt joined
07:36
ilbot3 joined
07:54
lizmat joined
|
|||
brrt | \o lizmat | 07:59 | |
09:05
FROGGS joined
09:21
brrt joined
13:42
domidumont joined
13:56
brrt joined
14:02
zakharyas joined
14:18
domidumont joined
15:15
domidumont joined
19:05
zakharyas joined
19:11
zakharyas joined
|