Category talk:ND-100 instructions - Revision history

Mike: Great

2013-03-22T16:05:28Z

Great

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:05, 22 March 2013
Line 14:		Line 14:

	--[[User:TArntsen\|TArntsen]] 10:03, 21 March 2013 (CET)		--[[User:TArntsen\|TArntsen]] 10:03, 21 March 2013 (CET)

			:Great! I think an additional field is the best way to go, for now. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 17:05, 22 March 2013 (CET)

TArntsen: Inserted a liine feed

2013-03-21T09:04:08Z

Inserted a liine feed

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:04, 21 March 2013
Line 6:		Line 6:
	(ea) means the value of the memory location pointed to by ea, not ea itself		(ea) means the value of the memory location pointed to by ea, not ea itself
	'ea' was used consistently that way already, now it's done for registers too. 'ea' is like a pseudo-register in this respect (in reality it is a physical register of course - the CPU sets it up before accessing memory)		'ea' was used consistently that way already, now it's done for registers too. 'ea' is like a pseudo-register in this respect (in reality it is a physical register of course - the CPU sets it up before accessing memory)

	Other things that could be fixed (noticed along the way):		Other things that could be fixed (noticed along the way):
	* Use of = vs := (we should e.g. settle on the latter)		* Use of = vs := (we should e.g. settle on the latter)

TArntsen: About the 'Register notation uniformity fix' changes

2013-03-21T09:03:10Z

About the 'Register notation uniformity fix' changes

New page

I went ahead and straightened out the instruction register notation format in the infoboxes. There was a mix of methods, sometimes even inside the same infobox.
The following notation is now used for all instructions:
X means the value of register X
(X) means the value of the memory location pointed to by X, not X itself
ea means effective address, the actual address
(ea) means the value of the memory location pointed to by ea, not ea itself
'ea' was used consistently that way already, now it's done for registers too. 'ea' is like a pseudo-register in this respect (in reality it is a physical register of course - the CPU sets it up before accessing memory)
Other things that could be fixed (noticed along the way):
* Use of = vs := (we should e.g. settle on the latter)
* Sometimes the 'Affected' infobox field is used to describe the actual function (e.g. 'if X=1 then A=(ea)'), but this is not always feasible, so others just lists registers
* Sometimes flags affected are listed as well
So maybe we need an additional field which pseudo-explains the operation, and the Affected field could just be a list like it's sometimes used. Or we figure out an even better way.

--[[User:TArntsen|TArntsen]] 10:03, 21 March 2013 (CET)