From: Ben S. <pow...@16...> - 2014-02-26 02:01:16
|
Hello, 1. Can line 5782 be deduced from line 5783 ? So line 5783 is enough and line 5782 is redundant ? 2. for line 5785, does "aopInReg (cond->aop, i, Y_IDX)" equal to "aopInReg (cond->aop, i, YH_IDX) && aopInReg (cond->aop, i + 1, YL_IDX))", so either one is enough ? Ben |
From: Philipp K. K. <pk...@sp...> - 2014-02-27 21:14:54
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am 26.02.2014 03:01, schrieb Ben Shi: > Hello, > > 1. Can line 5782 be deduced from line 5783 ? So line 5783 is enough > and line 5782 is redundant ? 2. for line 5785, does "aopInReg > (cond->aop, i, Y_IDX)" equal to "aopInReg (cond->aop, i, YH_IDX) && > aopInReg (cond->aop, i + 1, YL_IDX))", so either one is enough ? > > Ben aopInReg (cond->aop, i, Y_IDX) is true, iff aop at i is in register y the ormal way. aopInReg (cond->aop, i, YH_IDX) && aopInReg (cond->aop, i + 1, YL_IDX)) is true, iff aop at i is in register y with the bytes swapped, i.e. the more significant byte in yl, and the less significant byte in yh. Philipp -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMPqr0ACgkQbtUV+xsoLpqgMgCcCieZVYZeDw4NVCDi3JzDmd09 oaQAn3oKAZSqwIsXXxpB7mOf3RypisZu =7nHt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |