<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Bert Freudenberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bert@freudenbergs.de" target="_blank">bert@freudenbergs.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">+ 139 10001011 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Invoke primitive number jjjjjjjjkkkkkkkk<br>
-<br>
140 10001100 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Push Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj<br>
141 10001101 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Store Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj<br>
142 10001110 kkkkkkkk jjjjjjjj Pop and Store Temp At kkkkkkkk In Temp Vector At: jjjjjjjj<br>
143 10001111 llllkkkk jjjjjjjj iiiiiiii Push Closure Num Copied llll Num Args kkkk BlockSize jjjjjjjjiiiiiiii<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Why is the primitive index in bytecode 139 stored little-endian? The other bytecodes with immediate args > 8 bits are in big endian (e.g. push closure copy)</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No reason beyond my habit and preference. </div></div><br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-size:small;border-collapse:separate"><div>_,,,^..^,,,_<br></div><div>best, Eliot</div></span></div></div></div>
</div></div>