 | | Re: The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
(...) I guess what I'm saying is '<<=', 'OP_ASL' and 'OP_LSL' are all the same thing (zero fill). '>>=' means either 'OP_ASR' (smear fill) or 'OP_LSR' (zero fill) depending on whether your target is signed or not. If you wanted direct equivalents (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
(...) Having used shifts in Z80 assembly before, I can see the uses of the different types. However, I can't see how I'd want anything other than arithmetical in the NBC opcodes. The only times I used logical, rotating, or with-carry-bit shifts was (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding syscalls/opcodes to NXT-G
|
|
(...) Can you flesh this out a bit? What do you have in mind when you say "create from it a new program clump"? The current version of the firmware limits the size of this buffer to 64 bytes. I increased that limit in my recent changes to be 800 (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Adding syscalls/opcodes to NXT-G
|
|
One of the biggest problems with extending the current FW is that the NI compiler for NXT-G/NXTToolkit is not so flexible. In particular, one can't add new syscalls. Here's a suggestion I would be happy to hear your ideas on - the NXT-G compiler has (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
There are several opcodes defined in c_cmd_bytecodes.h which are missing from the VM implementation in c_cmd.c Here are the ones that are not implemented: //Family: Bit manipulation #define OP_CMNT 0x0A // dest, src #define OP_LSL 0x0B // dest, src (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
