6502/SixtyPical
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/catseye/SixtyPical.git synced 2024-11-29 18:49:22 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Try to spell out my idea for an algorithm for this.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Chris Pressey 2018-03-27 17:05:41 +01:00
parent c707105cd3
commit f86041721d
1 changed files with 10 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
README.md
View File

@ -78,6 +78,16 @@ are trashed inside the block.
Not because it saves 3 bytes, but because it's a neat trick. Doing it optimally Not because it saves 3 bytes, but because it's a neat trick. Doing it optimally
is probably NP-complete. But doing it adequately is probably not that hard. is probably NP-complete. But doing it adequately is probably not that hard.
> Every routine is falled through to by zero or more routines.
> Don't consider the main routine.
> For each routine α that is finally-falled through to by a set of routines R(α),
> pick a movable routine β from R, move β in front of α, remove the `jmp` at the end of β and
> mark β as unmovable.
> Note this only works if β finally-falls through. If there are multiple tail
> positions, we can't eliminate all the `jmp`s.
> Note that if β finally-falls through to α it can't finally-fall through to anything
> else, so the sets R(α) should be disjoint for every α. (Right?)
### And at some point... ### And at some point...
* `low` and `high` address operators - to turn `word` type into `byte`. * `low` and `high` address operators - to turn `word` type into `byte`.