Re: HLL expression -> ASM

"Bill A." <bill@megahits.com>
10 Apr 2001 01:32:53 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
HLL expression -> ASM alexfru@chat.ru (Alexei A. Frounze) (2001-03-26)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM danb2k@hotmail.com (Dan Bishop) (2001-03-27)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM dummy_addressee@hotmail.com (Alexei A. Frounze) (2001-03-31)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM titzer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Ben L. Titzer) (2001-03-31)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM rhyde@transdimension.com (Randall Hyde) (2001-03-31)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2001-04-04)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM dummy_addressee@hotmail.com (Alexei A. Frounze) (2001-04-10)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM bill@megahits.com (Bill A.) (2001-04-10)
Re: HLL expression -> ASM henry@spsystems.net (2001-04-10)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Bill A." <bill@megahits.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 10 Apr 2001 01:32:53 -0400
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
References: 01-03-131 01-04-021
Keywords: code, 386
Posted-Date: 10 Apr 2001 01:32:53 EDT

"Marco van de Voort" <marcov@stack.nl> wrote in message
> Most expressions can be evaluated using 4 regs. The problem that for
> integer (as somebody already said) is that mul and div need specific
> registers.


Even in these cases, it's easier and not horribly inefficient to
simply push/pop registers around instructions that require registers
that are busy.


In fact, using the stack to spill for general expression intermediate
results is fast and requires less code than directly spilling to
memory or through a frame pointer. You can often pop into any unused
register and as the pop is required after evaluating the
subexpression, you often can pop right into a register which becomes
the next operator's operand.


Bill Auerbach

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.