Subj : C is the most efficient p
To   : Boraxman
From : Digital Man
Date : Sun Dec 26 2021 08:53:51

  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: <61C6BCF6.3338.dove_dove-prg@digitaldistortionbbs.com>
 >  Ni> @REPLY: <61C649CF.2751.dove-prg@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
 >  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: 48.9øF, 79.0% humidity, 3 mph NW wind, 0.23 inches rain/24hrs
---
 þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

.