Subj : C is the most efficient p
To   : Boraxman
From : Digital Man
Date : Sun Dec 26 2021 08:53 am

 Re: C is the most efficient p
 By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Sun Dec 26 2021 09:27 pm

> -=> Nightfox wrote to Boraxman <=-
>
>  Ni> @MSGID: <[email protected]>
>  Ni> @REPLY: <[email protected]>
>  Ni>   Re: C is the most efficient p
>  Ni>   By: Boraxman to Nightfox on
>  Ni> Sat Dec 25 2021 09:12 am
>
>  Ni>> But still, assembler for each processor is defined by the operations
>  Ni>> that the processor understands, and there is a specific syntax for
>  Ni>> each operation.
>
>  Bo> Have you ever used AT&T syntax?
>
>  Ni> I haven't.
>
> It's an alternative syntax for assembler, used by GAS and I guess other
> assemblers for Unix too.
>
> An example from a program I wrote is below
>
>      movl %eax, BRK_Start
>      movl %eax, BRK_End
>      movl (%esp), %ecx
>      cmp $1, %ecx
>      je clifail
>      cmp $3, %ecx
>      jg clifail
>      movl 8(%esp), %ebx
>      jl success
>      movb (%ebx), %al
>
>
> As you can see, the syntax is familiar, but different.  Source and
> destination are the other way around for MOV commands, the offset notation
> is different, immediate values are prefixed with a $.

Motorola 68K assemblers used the "move source, destination" as well (opposite of Intel/x86 assemblers).

Basically, there's no real "standard" when it comes to assembly languages.
--
                                           digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #38:
Artie Fufkin:  I'm not asking, I'm telling with this. Kick my ass.
Norco, CA WX: 48.9�F, 79.0% humidity, 3 mph NW wind, 0.23 inches rain/24hrs

---
� Synchronet � Vertrauen � Home of Synchronet � [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net