
Adventures in JIT Compilation (2017) - azhenley
https://eli.thegreenplace.net/2017/adventures-in-jit-compilation-part-1-an-interpreter/
======
moonchild
> since registers are specified in sub-byte nibbles, one needs very good
> memory and tons of experience to predict what goes where

Nope, you just need to use octal instead of hex -
[https://web.archive.org/web/20041117160755if_/http://www.dab...](https://web.archive.org/web/20041117160755if_/http://www.dabo.de:80/ccc99/www.camp.ccc.de/radio/help.txt)

~~~
CalChris
Since x86 has 8-registers and x86_64 doubles that with a prefix (REX) byte,
yeah, looking at that machine code in octal makes a lot more sense. It looks,
dare I say it, kinda RISCy.

~~~
moonchild
Not to mention 16 _more_ 256-bit simd registers.

------
dang
Discussed a bit at the time:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13938935](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13938935)

------
ficklepickle
I thoroughly enjoyed that. As someone who programs almost exclusively in high
level languages, I learned a lot. It made brainfuck a bit more intelligible,
too. It was actually a great choice of language for this exercise.

------
twhitmore
I would recommend building a tutorial around a source language that wasn't
deliberately obtuse.

I do see it makes the parser simple, but it reduces the audience to the small
fraction that think a deliberately confusing language is useful.

My opinion anyway.

