This is the mail archive of the cgen@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the CGEN project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFA:] Fix lsb? bug with insn fields beyond base insn size.


> From: Doug Evans <dje@transmeta.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 08:18:11 -0700 (PDT)

> Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
>  > The highest bit-number minus the lowest bit-number is the
>  > number of bits less one.
> 
> Assuming one defines the field to be [low,high].
> Another legitimate definition, within a localized context such
> as intermediates used to produce some final result, is [low,high).
> I'm sure there are other contexts where such a definition is legitimate.

Ok, the comment above field-high and field-low needs expansion,
since "canonicalize on the low and high numbered ends of the
field; use the lsb?-adjusted numbering only when necessary" is
ambiguous, opening up to such off-by-one interpretation.  Never
mind, as mentioned I'll send a new patch.

brgds, H-P


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]