-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Output of subruledefs ignored in asm{...} #172
Comments
A slightly better example:
Simply assigning to a temporary changes the output versus just directly passing; so it seems when passing one subruledef to another, the input is run through the validation, then the input is copied to the input of the new subruledef, but the output of the original subruledef is discarded, when the desire is to chain the output into the input. Looking at the above, I would expect most people would agree that the output of |
Yeah... This was by design, but it doesn't seem to have been the best idea. The idea is that whenever the referenced variable comes directly from the instruction parameters (i.e. not a local variable declared in the body), the assembler will prioritize a "token-for-token substitution", ignoring the calculated value completely. This is needed when the nested instructions are also expecting some kind of special token (such as if you have a I'm thinking now that the best solution would be to use different syntax when you want token-for-token substitution. This would be a breaking change again, but I think it'd be clearer. Something like |
Possibly related to #170
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: