Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #167552
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler |
| Date | 2022-09-08 19:23 +0100 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <tfdbu8$1va3$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <cecefea6-c480-4bd2-a102-94576974289en@googlegroups.com> <tfbaqq$tl9$1@gioia.aioe.org> <76dca35b-fe93-46ee-99b6-ac1cefa72098n@googlegroups.com> <tfd2em$1als$1@gioia.aioe.org> <UYoSK.101322$6gz7.60364@fx37.iad> |
On 08/09/2022 17:43, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 08/09/2022 13:20, Thiago Adams wrote: > >> There are syntax differences between different assemblers, but they're >> not great. (Only gcc's 'gas' or 'AT&T' format is very different, but >> even that has an option to accept the more standard Intel-style format.) > > Define standard, in this context. The AT&T syntax preceeded the intel > syntax (as it was originally designed for the PDP-11 where source > operands always preceeded destination operands) by several years. > Not to mention that the majority of mainframe assembler syntaxes > also had destination operands following source operands, even those > without general purpose registers. > > The AT&T syntax is far more concise and readable without all the > useless annotations (e.g. DWORD everywhere). > > YMMV and opinions differ. > The context was x64 and x86, which were successors to 8086 which was a development of 8080, all Intel products. AFAIK those have always used a destination operand on the left in their assemblers.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 18:44 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@example.invalid> - 2022-09-06 02:48 -0400
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-06 10:08 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-09-07 12:27 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 05:45 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 15:35 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 16:38 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:04 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2022-09-07 19:14 +0300
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:31 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:40 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:49 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 19:27 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 20:02 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 21:03 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:52 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 07:14 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-14 10:59 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-15 23:46 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:17 +0200
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 19:58 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:26 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 23:42 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:45 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:40 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 10:28 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:05 +0200
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 15:28 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 00:51 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 05:20 -0700
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 16:41 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-09-08 16:43 +0000
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 19:23 +0100
Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 09:59 -0700
csiph-web