Closed larsbrinkhoff closed 7 years ago
Both mistakes. I missed that there was a double definition of header,
and added the 0 ,
to get things working, but I should have just deleted the second definition of header,
, I think.
Both mistakes.
Maybe not! Because asm.fth says
: header parse-name header, 'dodoes , scount @ , reveal ;
Fixed by 9cda437.
The asm.js target.fth has two definitions for
header,
, which is probably a mistake.Also,
docol,
etc compile a zero cell before the code field proper. I'm not sure that's by design or not. Is that the place for the "codeid", or the does field? I think the latter. But then the zero could probably move toheader,
like in the C target.@pipcet, do you have any comment on this?