search for: 0b100101

...IntRegs:$b, simm13:$c))]>; } which allows it to use instructions like: defm AND : F3_12<"and" , 0b000001, and>; defm OR : F3_12<"or" , 0b000010, or>; defm XOR : F3_12<"xor" , 0b000011, xor>; defm SLL : F3_12<"sll" , 0b100101, shl>; defm SRL : F3_12<"srl" , 0b100110, srl>; defm SRA : F3_12<"sra" , 0b100111, sra>; defm ADD : F3_12<"add" , 0b000000, add>; defm ADDCC : F3_12<"addcc", 0b010000, addc>; defm ADDX : F3_12<"addx" , 0b...

Hi, I'm trying to implement a new backend for an embedded CISC processor. Therefore I thought that it makes sense to take X86 target as a basis, to save some time. But when I look into the X86InstrInfo.td, I have a very strong feeling that it is one of the most complex instruction set descriptions compared to other targets. I can imagine that this is due to the complexity of X86's

...; > which allows it to use instructions like: > > defm AND : F3_12<"and" , 0b000001, and>; > defm OR : F3_12<"or" , 0b000010, or>; > defm XOR : F3_12<"xor" , 0b000011, xor>; > defm SLL : F3_12<"sll" , 0b100101, shl>; > defm SRL : F3_12<"srl" , 0b100110, srl>; > defm SRA : F3_12<"sra" , 0b100111, sra>; > defm ADD : F3_12<"add" , 0b000000, add>; > defm ADDCC : F3_12<"addcc", 0b010000, addc>; > defm ADDX : F3_12...

...AM WineBottler[15410] ###BOTTLING### installing nocrashdialog 11-01-11 11:20:39 AM WineBottler[15410] ###FINISHED### 11-01-11 11:21:34 AM WineBottlerStarter[17709] C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe 11-01-11 11:23:45 AM Mail[237] *** CFMessagePort: dropping corrupt reply Mach message (0b100101) 11-01-11 11:24:05 AM com.apple.backupd-auto[17754] Not starting scheduled Time Machine backup - time machine destination not resolvable. 11-01-11 11:27:41 AM WineBottler[15410] installPredefined 11-01-11 11:27:44 AM WineBottler[15410] ###BOTTLING### ie6Win98.sh 11-01-11 11:27:44 AM WineBottler[154...