search for: instructioncontext_t

...use "Instruction" or "Instr" instead of "Insn" for consistency's sake. 9. You have types called "operandType_t", etc. We normally don't use the "_t" suffix for types. Perhaps renaming them. 10. In the "static inline bool outranks(instructionContext_t upper, instructionContext_t lower)", it would be good to assert that upper and lower are strictly less than IC_max. 11. In several places, you put 'default: assert(0 && "Badness happens here!");" at the end of a switch statement. When assertions are turned o...

Dear mailing list: the attached diff implements a table-driven disassembler for the X86 architecture (16-, 32-, and 64-bit incarnations), integrated into the MC framework. The disassembler is table-driven, using a custom TableGen backend to generate hierarchical tables optimized for fast decode. The disassembler consumes MemoryObjects and produces arrays of MCInsts, adhering to the

...ke. Fixed. Thanks for the heads-up. > 9. You have types called "operandType_t", etc. We normally don't use > the "_t" suffix for types. Perhaps renaming them. Fixed. Now for example operandType_t is OperandType. > 10. In the "static inline bool outranks(instructionContext_t upper, > instructionContext_t lower)", it would be good to assert that upper > and lower are strictly less than IC_max. Asserted. > 11. In several places, you put 'default: assert(0 && "Badness > happens here!");" at the end of a switch statement....