Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/04/17/15:22:05
Hallo Michael:
You wrote:
> I was just wondering if there is any way in which I can spawn NASM
> instead of AS for inline-assembly in GCC.
GCC generate AT&T syntax assembler, you can't modify that. So even is you
manage to spawn to NASM the code will be in AT&T syntax, so no advantages.
> Because, frankly AT&T syntax is
> giving me the shits.
I converted 100Kb of Intel 16 bit code into GAS syntax 32 bit code last year,
isn't so hard.
> I always thought that anything non-intel was better,
Intel have the ability to tweast all they made ;-)
> but I don't think it's the case here.
Hmmm ... I'm not so sure I think that AT&T syntax is more natural but GAS is
inferior that TASM.
> (Who ever heard of differentiating
> between movl, movw and movb, when it's obvious from the kinds of operands
> you use...)
Intel!!!, do you ever used: mov word ptr?, I prefer movw!
> Oh, and a related question: How do I make procs public in NASM, and how
> do I include it in GCC? (extrn void _procedure(void) ??)
I don't know, in AS is .globl ... ;-)
> Anyone who can spawn, use or fight over NASM vs AS, please email me,
> since newsgroups are very slow over my server...
I'm sending to both.
Gruesse, SET
------------------------------------ 0 --------------------------------
Visit my home page: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(541) 759 0013
- Raw text -