[OpenBIOS] Re: Paflof update

Stefan Reinauer stepan at suse.de
Mon Jun 24 12:48:17 CEST 2002

* Segher Boessenkool <segher at chello.nl> [020623 18:15]:
> > * use c style comments to not break non gcc compilers (compile
> >   with -ansi -pedantic)
> Try compiling it on a non-gcc compiler.  It won't work.

But it's a step closer.

> > * implement unaligned-w@, unaligned-w!, unaligned-l@, unaligned-l!
> I'd rather have these implemented in Forth; we have too many primitives
> already.

I don't agree on this. Unaligned accesses are slower than the aligned
versions anyways, plus we need to bloat the forth code with endianess
checks where we can solve this in the preprocessor in C. I made Forth 
versions of these words as well, but while thinking about when you need
unaligned accesses, I came to the conclusion that you probably don't
want further slowdown. It's ugly that you have to break up atomicity of
the access anyways. 

> > * use conf.pl to create types.h according to compiler capabilities
> >   (cross compiling possible) (cleaner version then last patch)
> I don't like it yet...
What's wrong?

> > * move unix host code from prim.code to unix.code
> Please leave it where it is, for now.  We'll move it when we compile
> stuff from source (as opposed to the current situation: from a precompiled
> dictionary).

Which reminds me that we also need support for multiple linked
dictionaries when doing packages. Though maybe it might be enough to
have multiple fcode lookup tables in the fcode evaluator?
Is there any trivial way of doing this? 

The x86 isn't all that complex - it just doesn't make a lot of
sense.          -- Mike Johnson, Leader of 80x86 Design at AMD
	                          Microprocessor Report (1994)
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at freiburg.linux.de
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message
http://www.freiburg.linux.de/OpenBIOS/ - free your system..

More information about the openbios mailing list