Re: [Nasm-devel] [nasm:master] nosplit: Limit the effect of NOSPLIT

[anonymous c. <nas...@us...>]

> You are at not proving any rationale, which is where this discussion ends up going in circles...

What rationale are you looking for?

Why 0.96 honors NOSPLIT for both, [reg+reg] and [reg*2]?
Ask Simon and Jules -- they introduced that behavior.

Why 0.98.34 honors NOSPLIT for both, [reg] and [reg*1]?
Because that way it matched the existing 2x behavior.

Why 2.11 no longer honors NOSPLIT for [reg] or [reg+reg]?
This breaks existing code. So I question its rationale.