Hi Tim,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:24 PM, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote:
On 20-06-2018, at 11:46 AM, Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda@gmail.com
wrote:
I propose extending the semantics of 164 & 165 so that they match 60 &
61, except that they provide signed access to 8, 16, 32 & 64 bit pure bits formats, and providing JIT implementations for maximum performance. Doing so should be easy; they are very close to the JIT implementations of 60 & 61.
Once this is done we could eliminate use of 143 & 144 if we changed
SoundBuffer to use primitives 164 & 165 and to have a variableDoubleWordSubclass: format.
Sounds like a sensible simplification to me; less code is better code in general! How many releases should we go through before removing 143/4 ?
I don't think it's pressing to remove them. They're not very complex and they're layered on top of existing Interpreter support for at:put: (commonAt et al).
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot