TODO ==== RPN: assembler fails selftest RPN: examples/cx16/cobramk3-gfx.p8 crashes compiler RPN: swirl is MUCH slower RPN: wizzine is slightly slower RPN: bsieve is much slower then: RPN: swirl is bigger RPN: petaxian is 900 bytes larger, chess is a lot bigger RPN: cube3d is much larger, but a bit faster RPN: cube3d-float is massive and slow RPN: mandelbrot is bigger, but seems faster RPN: Implement RPN codegen for IR. For next minor release ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - ubyte fits = cxendvar, without adding a lot of code size/duplicating the loop condition. It is documented behavior to now loop 'around' $00 but it's too easy to forget about! Lot of work because of so many special cases in ForLoopsAsmgen..... (vm codegen already behaves like this) - generate WASM to eventually run prog8 on a browser canvas? Use binaryen toolkit or my binaryen kotlin library? - can we get rid of pieces of asmgen.AssignmentAsmGen by just reusing the AugmentableAssignment ? generated code should not suffer - [problematic due to using 64tass:] add a compiler option to not remove unused subroutines. this allows for building library programs. But this won't work with 64tass's .proc ... Perhaps replace all uses of .proc/.pend/.endproc by .block/.bend will fix that with a compiler flag? But all library code written in asm uses .proc already..... (textual search/replace when writing the actual asm?) Once new codegen is written that is based on the IR, this point is mostly moot anyway as that will have its own dead code removal on the IR level. - Zig-like try-based error handling where the V flag could indicate error condition? and/or BRK to jump into monitor on failure? (has to set BRK vector for that) But the V flag is also set on certain normal instructions - add special (u)word array type (or modifier?) that puts the array into memory as 2 separate byte-arrays 1 for LSB 1 for MSB -> allows for word arrays of length 256 and faster indexing this is an enormous amout of work, if this type is to be treated equally as existing (u)word , because all expression / lookup / assignment routines need to know about the distinction.... So maybe only allow the bare essntials? (store, get) Libraries: - fix the problems in c128 target, and flesh out its libraries. - fix the problems in atari target, and flesh out its libraries. - c64: make the graphics.BITMAP_ADDRESS configurable (VIC banking) - optimize several inner loops in gfx2 even further? - add modes 3 and perhaps even 2 to gfx2 (lores 16 color and 4 color)? - add a flood fill (span fill/scanline fill) routine to gfx2? Expressions: - Once the evalstack-free expression codegen is in place, the Eval Stack can be removed from the compiler. Machinedefinition, .p8 and .asm library files, all routines operationg on estack, and everything saving/restoring the X register related to this stack. - Or rewrite expression tree evaluation such that it doesn't use an eval stack but flatten the tree into linear code that, for instance, uses a fixed number of predetermined value 'variables'? The VM IL solves this already (by using unlimited registers) but that still lacks a translation to 6502. - this removes the need for the BinExprSplitter? (which is problematic and very limited now) and perhaps the assignment splitting in BeforeAsmAstChanger too Optimizations: - VariableAllocator: can we think of a smarter strategy for allocating variables into zeropage, rather than first-come-first-served? for instance, vars used inside loops first, then loopvars, then the rest - various optimizers skip stuff if compTarget.name==VMTarget.NAME. Once 6502-codegen is done from IR code, those checks should probably be removed, or be made permanent STRUCTS again? -------------- What if we were to re-introduce Structs in prog8? Some thoughts: - can contain only numeric types (byte,word,float) - no nested structs, no reference types (strings, arrays) inside structs - is just some syntactic sugar for a scoped set of variables -> ast transform to do exactly this before codegen. Codegen doesn't know about struct. - no arrays of struct -- because too slow on 6502 to access those, rather use struct of arrays instead. can we make this a compiler/codegen only issue? i.e. syntax is just as if it was an array of structs? or make it explicit in the syntax so that it is clear what the memory layout of it is. - ability to assign struct variable to another? this is slow but can be quite handy sometimes. however how to handle this in a function that gets the struct passed as reference? Don't allow it there? (there's no pointer dereferencing concept in prog8) - ability to be passed as argument to a function (by reference)? however there is no typed pointer in prog8 at the moment so this can't be implemented in a meaningful way yet, because there is no way to reference it as the struct type again. (current ast gets the by-reference parameter type replaced by uword) So-- maybe don't replace the parameter type in the ast? Should fix that for str and array types as well then