chris.umcp-cs@UDel-Relay (03/17/83)
From: Chris Torek <chris.umcp-cs@UDel-Relay> Date: 15 Jan 83 16:34:38 EST (Sat) Does anyone know of any reason not to change cvtl[bw] $value,dest to mov[bw] $value,dest via the optimizer? Wouldn't the second be both faster and shorter?
lee%usc-cse@USC-ECL (03/23/83)
There is not reason not to replace cvtl[bw] with mov[bw] in the cases where the source operand is a constant that is negative or larger than 64. Zero of course can be moved with clr[bw]. There is no advantage (or disadvantage) to the replacement if the constant is in the range 1-63 (or 64, I forget which) since the constant is stored in literal form in a single byte operand descriptor in either instruction. -- Lee