MAX and MIN inconsistent with P1

Seairth

P2's implementation appears to differ from P1, as the flags differ.

P1 MAX/MIN:
* Z : S=0

P2 MAX/MIN:
* Z : result=0

This change makes sense to me. Is this an intended change?

P1 MAX:
* C : D<S

P2 MAX:
* C : S<D

C for MIN is the same on P1 and P2. I suspect C for MAX on P2 is a bug.

I have not yet examined MAXS/MINS.

(rant: MAX is a bad name for this instruction. In most languages, it returns the maximum value, not the minimum value. Same goes for MIN. Maybe consider swapping MAX and MIN, then adding LMIN and LMAX as aliases for people who think in SPIN terms.)

Rayman

I think I'd call it "LMAX" for limit maximum.
This is another non-intuitive thing from P1...

Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)

Seairth wrote:

MAX is a bad name for this instruction. In most languages, it returns the maximum value, not the minimum value. Same goes for MIN.

Maybe, but it's consistent with both PBASIC and the P1. Think of MAX as being "at most" or "limit maximum" and MIN as being "at least" or "limit minimum."

-Phil

Seairth

I understand why it is. I just disagree.

Seairth

Just tested MAXS/MINS. Their behaviors exactly match MAX/MIN, respectively. Again, I suspect that the calculation of C is a bug.

Seairth

Started a P1/P2 comparison table/grid at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O27nO2tMjBTvUNblFFRtEp5DHvcvsSGXcPvH9FaJ9u8/edit#bookmark=id.n1suwwbjxuk4


Note: I did not list the "D<S" vs. "S<D" as a difference MAX/MAXS, since I suspect this is a bug.