From:	Ben Peddell <killer DOT lightspeed AT bigpond DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: One final inline assembly constraint question.
References:	<84e4e2a9 DOT 0307242201 DOT 4c8dbb84 AT posting DOT google DOT com>
Lines:	17
Message-ID:	<2c7Ua.13946$OM3.3560@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Date:	Fri, 25 Jul 2003 09:59:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	144.134.89.220
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT bigpond DOT net DOT au
X-Trace:	news-server.bigpond.net.au 1059127166 144.134.89.220 (Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:59:26 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:59:26 EST
Organization:	BigPond Internet Services
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Joel wrote:
> I have read up on, and am now pretty familiar with the usual "a" =
> eax, "S" = esi, and so on, but I'd like an example of one of the
> following please.
> "<" Autodecrement addressing memory
> ">" Autoincrement addressing memory
> Thank you.

Unfortunately, gcc does not accept ">" and "<" on the x86 (inconsistent 
operand constraints in an `asm'). It'll bypass the '<' or '>' if you 
specify another constraint with it (Multiple Alternative).
Perhaps because there are no implicitly auto-increment or auto-decrement 
registers on the x86.

If it did accept '<' and '>', then it could cld / std and use ESI for 
the output memory operand and EDI for the input memory operand.

- Raw text -