Re: Re: A 32-bit read/write with %io-port-read/write-succession

Frode wrote-
 
> This is, if my memory and code-reading ability isn't totally warped,
> incorrect. These operators deal purely with "raw" (untyped) data
> quantities, i.e. 8, 16, or 32 bits, both in terms of main memory and
> I/O-ports. So the object parameter is not type-checked in any way, and
> you (the caller) had better be knowledgeable about its memory layout
> etc.

Alrighty, thats way cooler than I thought it was :)  Thanks for the
explanation.  

> This is how e.g. the read-succession operator should work (i.e. the
> compiler-macro is just a hand-written assembly version of this code):

Frode, I don't know how busy you are, I assume you've got a lot on your
plate, but I'm just starting out with learning some asm in a processors
class and was wondering if you could explain some about what you did in
ia-x86?  Specifically, how it interfaces with lisp and what syntax
changes you settled on.  Any info would be cool :)
 
> The term "succession" btw I invented to mean a sequence/block of
> untyped memory. Suggestions for better names are welcome. Perhaps
> "memblock" or "memory-block" would be more easily understood?

Succession is totally appropriate for the function. My instincts say
"%io-group-read" or "%io-port-read-object" (etc.).  But the current
symbol should be fine, as long as the reader doesn't interpret it as
"secession", like only a half awake lame brain would ;) 

Thanks again Frode.