Re: cset seems to override the next byte
Bernd Paysan via Gforth discussion and announcements <gforth-mXXj517/[email protected]> Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:36:21 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.forth.gforth |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <16430042.G1GFlY6BUY@liubei> |
Am Montag, 28. Dezember 2020, 14:08:06 CET schrieb Anton Ertl: > We use CSET internally, so we may add a word with its current > functionality, but a different name. The convention would be to call > it SET, but I don't want to waste this name on a little-used word; > maybe MASK-SET or OR! would be appropriate names. I'm for this set: : or! ( x addr -- ) >r r@ @ or r> ! ; : xor! ( x addr -- ) >r r@ @ xor r> ! ; : and! ( x addr -- ) >r r@ @ and r> ! ; : xorc! ( x c-addr -- ) >r r@ c@ xor r> c! ; : andc! ( x c-addr -- ) >r r@ c@ and r> c! ; : orc! ( x c-addr -- ) >r r@ c@ or r> c! ; -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o id: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* https://net2o.de/
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEERJ1NDqPQRwYnwBjr9y2Uk5MtoGcFAl/qJaUACgkQ9y2Uk5Mt oGdfrA/+NIjMT7yOduKBPgG4L9QxKxYqfYXgntloTdXrwJCn5U9ZaXu0uUJHu838 v/T0smJV6qvmYS4r7ZMU1Hm4JAMMOVB5/YzJaoihE8DprJplFJSSeQZmYaxHw9KD lt+/F/KQcn4fgR/HvdyiWHMiFp3gly/1lHqlFlHgbr6zg/Gwu5hFxCr3aseSB8Yw bfJRuIBKIpy4V77M95uEmFu9gm29CXU8bm3cU0OssEW7l+D8RVNI4rs+++7HoW2P Cgmz3rxcRrm5PYjR/NmMG++ULMThGhqFz9QsOR9dq6imTa3pHB0A0dv+wP5Pzn/l OymZG2DHCbLUHf8IJ+NbTO3/oDpEsbc/no08atXjZzjFL/aoeG+0evwQAkwuqc9G bSYY5eLttvGU35v2otMJxtXIJqK65f+UpPClAtsPRxpppu9BtiIvi082gyUssJiQ WAP7R4codJxKDAw0l7wQXOEihDa7e5WS53yH3LBYccTR/dmgEhBFww+kmnqjQ2hR AQS+FNTdUT7hCJQAhYSGWYVIicON0I6mGuWKa60cTVSGyjmY/EPB1a8tBidW6nQJ sn3FlG6Ej2WhN+01Tn2FjPgb88UEb8eFGRVfrxf6GSgCm8+ZsHUrnmRdeGoPT30O SC42BF3LFE/8iJBFIn8fx6Rxhrcw9xMegi2qe5TW9EcVFDJTQgc= =7H2/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----