On 6 February 2017 10:39:11 GMT+00:00, Peter Maydell
wrote:
>On 6 February 2017 at 10:14, Ed Robbins wrote:
>> It seems pretty good. I was surprised that call instructions can
>> have arguments/return specified, and wonder if those are normally
>> just empty, so that emulation of the target st
On 6 February 2017 at 10:14, Ed Robbins wrote:
> It seems pretty good. I was surprised that call instructions can
> have arguments/return specified, and wonder if those are normally
> just empty, so that emulation of the target stack/registers just
> carries the args/return in the background. Othe
On 3 February 2017 14:46:15 GMT+00:00, Stefan Hajnoczi
wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:09:02PM +, E.Robbins wrote:
>> I having been looking for prior work on a formalised semantics for
>the TCG language. I have seen passing references, and wondered if
>anyone can provide any pointers?
>>
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:09:02PM +, E.Robbins wrote:
> I having been looking for prior work on a formalised semantics for the TCG
> language. I have seen passing references, and wondered if anyone can provide
> any pointers?
>
> If this is the wrong list for this question, apologies, pleas
Hello,
I having been looking for prior work on a formalised semantics for the TCG
language. I have seen passing references, and wondered if anyone can provide
any pointers?
If this is the wrong list for this question, apologies, please direct me
elsewhere.
Best,
Ed
