| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I273879e9d05260db0603bc5a36970e240f3e366a
|
|
the code doesn't quite run yet, that'll be a future CL
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I71e6a45127c1fc37906d902e36142c17afef2a21
|
|
also, add support for ;asm and stuff
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I904bc0c31e7e4c8b0abc7790f3af5d20c275f2a5
|
|
that was quite some debugging. the write-up is still in progress (see the TODO)
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: Ia1494bcde2b66e82efe8598899e93bdff60841d4
|
|
it depended on the execution-model stuff, for the "next" macro. in general, any word implemented in assembly will depend on that. so, the execution stuff is moved into its own file, leaving evoke.e with only the job of bringing everything together. that's a little disappointing because talking about the execution model seems like a good introduction to the whole topic, but perhaps the problem can be solved down the line with literate programming...
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: Ic2fe22dcc39980ef75763ae293e41024abc8ba38
|
|
memmove never had a heap-based implementation, probably due to excessive hurrying when it was first written. it has now been added. it's identical to the original static implementation.
a minor documentation error in evoke.e was discovered while coding this, and is now fixed.
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I55ff09712a992410167a53cd83e96a452ed49744
|
|
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I33ad8783283643ca4977ab19c378156436707687
|
|
Force-Push: yes
Change-Id: I063232ca7d840237f53dc805bc896c7b452cedc8
|