Re: Lua 5.1 Bytecode Question

[Klaas-Jan Stol <vanderlay@...>]

I forgot in the initial email, but there is also something changed in 
the header, as the reported register sizes do not match lua 5.0 sizes 
anymore.

Anyway, I think it would be a good idea to provide for a 
backward-compatibility mode.

regards,

klaas-jan

Tim Gogolin wrote:

> I'm also interested in the response to this...
> I write a lua "lint" like tool that works by analyzing byte codes and  
> looking for unexpected global references. Whenever I pull a new lua  
> version, that tool is always the first to break because the opcode  
> numbers no longer mean what they did before :-(
>
> -- Tim Gogolin
>
> On Jan 9, 2006, at 8:25 AM, Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I saw in the source of Lua 5.1 that there are 3 new instructions:
> > 1. the modulo instructions
> > 2. the "length" instruction
> > 3. the vararg instruction
> >
> > I also saw that they were inserted in the middle of the list of  
> > isntructions of 5.0. I understand that you'd like the "MOD" op with  
> > the rest of the binary ops, but it makes things a bit harder when  
> > creating tools, such as a bytecode translator or something. Is  there 
> > any chance any new ops are added to the /end/ of the list of  
> > instructions?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > klaas-jan stol