Baremetal is now the default build target and therefore has its sources
at the top-level. Baremetal programs build using the phase-2 Mu toolchain
that requires a Linux kernel. This phase-2 codebase which used to be at
the top-level is now under the linux/ directory. Finally, the phase-2 toolchain,
while self-hosting, has a way to bootstrap from a C implementation, which
is now stored in linux/bootstrap. The bootstrap C implementation uses some
literate programming tools that are now in linux/bootstrap/tools.
So the whole thing has gotten inverted. Each directory should build one
artifact and include the main sources (along with standard library). Tools
used for building it are relegated to sub-directories, even though those
tools are often useful in their own right, and have had lots of interesting
programs written using them.
A couple of things have gotten dropped in this process:
- I had old ways to run on just a Linux kernel, or with a Soso kernel.
No more.
- I had some old tooling for running a single test at the cursor. I haven't
used that lately. Maybe I'll bring it back one day.
The reorg isn't done yet. Still to do:
- redo documentation everywhere. All the README files, all other markdown,
particularly vocabulary.md.
- clean up how-to-run comments at the start of programs everywhere
- rethink what to do with the html/ directory. Do we even want to keep
supporting it?
In spite of these shortcomings, all the scripts at the top-level, linux/
and linux/bootstrap are working. The names of the scripts also feel reasonable.
This is a good milestone to take stock at.
I built this in 3 phases:
a) create a helper in the bootstrap VM to render the state of the stack.
b) interactively arrive at the right function (tools/stack_array.subx)
c) pull the final solution into the standard library (093stack_allocate.subx)
As the final layer says, this may not be the fastest approach for most
(or indeed any) Mu programs. Perhaps it's better on balance for the compiler
to just emit n/4 `push` instructions.
(I'm sure this solution can be optimized further.)
Signed and unsigned don't quite capture the essence of what the different
combinations of x86 flags are doing for SubX. The crucial distinction is
that one set of comparison operators is for integers and the second is
for addresses.
Kartik K. Agaram