Author | Message |
0CodErr Ziron Guru (send private message) Posts: 199 Topics: 37 Location: | [1476] Augmented assignment - posted: 2015-01-17 13:48:14 Currently supported: Code:
And yet not supported: Code:
Also pay attention that in const expression someone could write: Code:
|
Admin Site Admin (send private message) Posts: 933 Topics: 55 Location: OverHertz Studio | [1479] - posted: 2015-01-17 14:26:35 I am avoiding to add the ability to write complex expressions to keep the simple assembly readability. But I will consider to add some of these. such as eax != ... etc. Download Ziron Get free hosting for Ziron related fan-sites and Ziron projects, contact me in private message. |
Admin Site Admin (send private message) Posts: 933 Topics: 55 Location: OverHertz Studio | [1483] - posted: 2015-01-20 21:13:29 OK, i have implemented the following: Code:
They will be available on todays release. Download Ziron Get free hosting for Ziron related fan-sites and Ziron projects, contact me in private message. |
0CodErr Ziron Guru (send private message) Posts: 199 Topics: 37 Location: | [1485] - posted: 2015-01-20 21:44:47 Just a suggestion. Because Ziron-- similar to C-like language, perhaps it would be better to keep close to the ะก syntax. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitwise_operations_in_C#Bitwise_NOT_.22.7E.22_.2F_one.27s_complement_.28unary.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitwise_operations_in_C#Logical_equivalents |
Admin Site Admin (send private message) Posts: 933 Topics: 55 Location: OverHertz Studio | [1488] - posted: 2015-01-20 21:52:17 I never planned for Ziron to resemble C, but I am happy to add ~ as an additional not operator. Download Ziron Get free hosting for Ziron related fan-sites and Ziron projects, contact me in private message. |
0CodErr Ziron Guru (send private message) Posts: 199 Topics: 37 Location: | [1494] - posted: 2015-01-21 14:04:11 Why we should pay attention to this? You write Code:
This is something more complicated than others. In the first post I suggested the Code:
If we do like Code:
But we already have "-=" operator. If we do make an exception for this then our language will be less orthogonal than it could be. If we want to use more complicated expressions then i think we also should use something like this: Code:
|
Admin Site Admin (send private message) Posts: 933 Topics: 55 Location: OverHertz Studio | [1495] - posted: 2015-01-21 18:57:24 != is for not equal. eax != eax is eax = not eax eax != ecx is eax = not ecx Maybe I misunderstand your question. Code:
Output: Code:
!= and -= are not the same. as for -eax, i missed that one, added now for next release. Download Ziron Get free hosting for Ziron related fan-sites and Ziron projects, contact me in private message. |
0CodErr Ziron Guru (send private message) Posts: 199 Topics: 37 Location: | [1500] - posted: 2015-01-21 21:06:43 I mean that if we support more complex expressions then right variant is Code:
or Code:
but not Code:
|
Currently Active Users: There are currently 17 user(s) online. 0 member(s) and 17 guest(s) Most users ever online was 1046, January 28, 2022, 2:08 pm. Statistics: Threads: 225 | Posts: 1848 | Members: 51 | Active Members: 51 Welcome to our newest member, yecate |