�� �� I'm making good progress on 64-bit Spur in the Stack VM simulator.�� But I've just noticed an image-level issue which could be indicative of lots of 32-bit assumptions baked into the Squeal/Pharo/Newspeak systems.
SmallInteger>>digitAt: n��
"Answer the value of an indexable field in the receiver.�� LargePositiveInteger uses bytes of base two number, and each is a 'digit' base 256.�� Fail if the argument (the index) is not an Integer or is out of bounds."
n>4 ifTrue: [^ 0].
self < 0
ifTrue:��
[self = SmallInteger minVal ifTrue:
["Can't negate minVal -- treat specially"
^ #(0 0 0 64) at: n].
^ ((0-self) bitShift: (1-n)*8) bitAnd: 16rFF]
ifFalse: [^ (self bitShift: (1-n)*8) bitAnd: 16rFF]
This assumes that SmallInteger is only ever 4 bytes, which is unacceptably wasteful for my approach to 64-bits. In 64-bit Spur, SmallIntegers are 61-bit 2's complement.
I'm raising this example at this point to see if the community might find similar issues and bring them to my attention.
--