From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dave Brolley <brolley@redhat.com>
To: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@cambridge.redhat.com>
Cc: cgen@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Endianness and CGEN_INT_INSN_P
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 08:38:00 -0000
Message-id: <3A520486.9060300@redhat.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101021343260.19790-100000@host149.cambridge.redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-q1/msg00003.html

 From what I understand, CGEN_INT_INSN_P will not be true if there is at 
least one insn which will not fit into the word.

Dave

Richard Sandiford wrote:

> When CGEN_INT_INSN_P is true, the instruction gets written as a single
> integer with the bytes arranged according to the target endianness.  This
> only seems appropriate when every instruction is one word long.  Is this
> right?  If so, would it be better to restrict CGEN_INT_INSN_P to that
> case, or would it better to handle the multi-word case when
> CGEN_INT_INSN_P is true?
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> 
>