You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As mentioned in #2553, we currently use emit functions in the ByteCompiler to generate opcode and their arguments, which could lead to a bug if the emits are incorrectly ordered or removed. We could maybe generate emit functions for every opcode via a macro and/or trait e.g. Opcode::GetFunction::emit to stabilize the emitting of an opcode and it's required arguments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Could be ideal to have a RawOp with the raw instruction set, then have an Instruction enum as our API to push instructions to the codeblock. This enum would then have a function like emit(&mut CodeBlock) that automatically pushes its RawOp representation and its operands to the code.
As mentioned in #2553, we currently use emit functions in the
ByteCompiler
to generate opcode and their arguments, which could lead to a bug if the emits are incorrectly ordered or removed. We could maybe generate emit functions for every opcode via a macro and/or trait e.g.Opcode::GetFunction::emit
to stabilize the emitting of an opcode and it's required arguments.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: