Instead of writing a traditional 6502/8501/Z80/etc. backend for general-purpose IRs like LLVM, I wonder whether these platforms are constrained enough that a superoptimizer could generate more optimal code in reasonable time
-
Completely unrelated, but I've been reading a lot of Z80 assembly lately, having never seen it before... WHY DOES NOBODY CALL OUT THAT `c` MEANS SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON THE CONTEXT
And why does every ASM syntax feel the need to have such arcane incantations for every instruction name and register name? It's not like the names used by an assembler affect the size of the actual instruction
-
-
Back when I was programming assembly just getting the assembly _source_ to fit in the ~32K we could use was often a challenge. Nowadays: no excuse.
-
Did assemblers back then not support including multiple files?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.