Sorry if I've asked these years ago and just don't remember the answer.
> The '/copy-to-ebx' after the slashes is just my way of helping the reader understand what the instruction does. I don't want the reader to have to consult the Intel manual for every instruction, even if I'm forcing the writer to do so.
Why not make the comment the instruction and the bytes the (maybe even optional?) comment in that case then?
From your first post.
> The fact that C compilers are written in C contributes a lot of the complexity that makes compilers black magic to most people.
Isn't this more a symptom of C though? I'm hoping this is generally not true if you replace C with other languages (but could be very wrong). But more generally, I'm thinking you could make "the compiler's inner workings is not black magic" a constraint rather than make not writing the higher level language in the higher level language the constraint.
In my case, I tried that first route and then moved to instead having the compiler written in the higher level language but emitting output that's close enough to (my) handwritten lower level language.
I'll have to read your two part post more carefully though. Glad to see this project getting some attention, even though in an unusual fashion.
> The '/copy-to-ebx' after the slashes is just my way of helping the reader understand what the instruction does. I don't want the reader to have to consult the Intel manual for every instruction, even if I'm forcing the writer to do so.
Why not make the comment the instruction and the bytes the (maybe even optional?) comment in that case then?
From your first post.
> The fact that C compilers are written in C contributes a lot of the complexity that makes compilers black magic to most people.
Isn't this more a symptom of C though? I'm hoping this is generally not true if you replace C with other languages (but could be very wrong). But more generally, I'm thinking you could make "the compiler's inner workings is not black magic" a constraint rather than make not writing the higher level language in the higher level language the constraint.
In my case, I tried that first route and then moved to instead having the compiler written in the higher level language but emitting output that's close enough to (my) handwritten lower level language.
I'll have to read your two part post more carefully though. Glad to see this project getting some attention, even though in an unusual fashion.