Re: made up byte code: registers vs. literals

cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (Cliff Click)
3 Dec 1996 20:46:28 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
made up byte code: registers vs. literals jklein@freon.artificial.com (1996-11-24)
Re: made up byte code: registers vs. literals bear@sonic.net (Ray S. Dillinger) (1996-12-01)
Re: made up byte code: registers vs. literals cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (1996-12-03)
Re: made up byte code: registers vs. literals kaleja@rahul.net (Russell Bornsch++) (1996-12-03)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (Cliff Click)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 3 Dec 1996 20:46:28 -0500
Organization: none
References: 96-11-149 96-12-020
Keywords: architecture, optimize

"Ray S. Dillinger" <bear@sonic.net> writes:


> In a RISC architecture there *are no* instructions that deal with literals,
> except one: it loads a literal value into a register. Also, there are
> exactly two instructions that deal with main memory; load and store.


Actually, most RISC ISAs fold 1 add in with the load and store;
either add 2 registers or add a register and literal. This follows
from having 2 addressing modes available on most instructions:
reg+reg and reg+literal.


Cliff
--
Cliff Click, Ph.D. Compiler Researcher & Designer
RISC Software, Motorola PowerPC Compilers
cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (512) 891-7240
http://members.aol.com/mjclick1
--

Post a followup to this message

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