delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Sun, 7 Mar 1999 13:48:37 +0200 (IST) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | "Paganini <Nathan E. Banks>" <paganini AT madisontelco DOT com> |
cc: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: Assembler types |
In-Reply-To: | <7bsmc2$rvt$1@news3.infoave.net> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.990307134817.26544e-100000@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Paganini <Nathan E. Banks> wrote: > So neither one is really better than the other...it's just religious...like > whether to comment or to document? No, it's not religious. GCC produces its assembly output in the AT&T style, so it must use Gas which accepts that style. NASM doesn't accept AT&T style, so it cannot be used with the compiler. But you *can* use NASM to compile assembly-language modules.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |