-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Naggum.Assembler #30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Naggum.Assembler #30
Conversation
6a75c6a to
db62604
Compare
|
@gsomix, the rebase is done, please take a look at this. |
|
I've rebased these changes against latest |
|
Well, I'll review it myself. Sorry, mr. @gsomix, but we need to move on with that. I hope you'll be able to catch up new pull requests later. |
Naggum.Assembler/Assembler.fs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we really add method overload resolution here? I doubt: here the user has written the method exactly as he wants it to be resolved, without any compiler-involved resolution step.
Naggum.Assembler/Processor.fs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please define argument types for public API.
Assembler: initial implementation.
According to #19 I am starting my work through assembler. It will become more feature-rich in future (the next big thing should be the macro subsystem while it may take a few additional steps to add some of the missing instructions), but that't the first little step.
Also I've renamed all the executable assemblies to use the more appropriate names (
Naggum.Compiler,Naggum.Interactive). I think we'll create a platform-dependent convenience scripts with shorter names in future (nga,ngcandngitrinity would be nice).