Thu Mar 20 10:43:43 EDT 2008
code structure: line or graph?
now.. look in to the 'structured assembler' (something from an Olin
Shivers writeup about a project he worked on doing dataflow
if assembly is just a serialized expression graph, why not keep it a
graph longer? there are some features used in purrr that assume
serialized code (fallthrough). is this really necessary? or should
such code be grouped somehow as a single function with multiple entry
points. it's interesting as low-level control, but a pain to do code
transformations.. the rep mentioned above already has this.
now, with this structured asm thing, maybe all local label issues can
be solved that way too?
* unify macros and forth words (meaning of ';')
* defining LHS/RHS and ':'