Re: Regexp bytecode disassembler

[Mattias Engdegård]

20 mars 2020 kl. 16.39 skrev Pip Cet <address@hidden>:

> I think we should warn more about the non-reentrancy of our regexp
> code, though: the disassembled text of a regexp may change when it is
> used to match a string. Alternatively, we could omit volatile state
> information from the disassembled text.

Yes, I added some vague verbiage to the doc string about this.

> I don't think
>  exactn "a"
> is very readable, since there's no n on the right hand side. exactn 1,
> "a" would reflect the bytecode more precisely, while exact "a" would
> work better as a description, IMHO.

OK, 'exact' it is.

> I'd use nreverse rather than reverse, if we're worried about garbage
> collecting a few cells :-)

Correctness first, but since the code now is correct!, we can nreverse.

> I'd print the address of the "value" of succeed-n etc separately: that
> makes it easier to find the corresponding set-number-at.

This irked me as well, so I went the other way and changed the set-number-at 
pretty-printer to use the address of the target instruction rather than that of 
the value field.