Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1999/03/24/02:34:56
DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > Not a problem there: will `parse error' do? djasm already does that due
> > to it's design (great feature, that, though sometimes a parse error can
> > be rather uninformative).
>
> I'm thinking add the patterns for the "wrong" syntax, and have them
> print errors warning people about the confusion.
Hmm, pretty easy to do, and seams to be a resonable idea (more info to
the programmer is good).
ob sh[lr]dl: It seems to me that you (DJ) agree sh[lr]d should not be
overloaded (I hate mul (imul?) for that), but I don't think I've ever
been entirely happy with sh[lr]dl. It can be used in both 16 and 32 bit
modes (determined by the register, thankfully always present) and I
think the name is slightly confusing with that 'd' in there (is that
what you meant by vague earlier?). sh[lr]l didn't work for me either.
If anybody comes up with a good mnemonic (or we decide that overloading
a mnemonic isn't so bad, but I *really* don't like that, assembly can be
confusing), I'll make the change.
Hmmm, what about lshr[lr]? (just hit me)
Bill
--
Leave others their otherness.
- Raw text -