delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | "Shawn Harrison" <zils AT fuse DOT net>, crazyfingers AT fuse DOT net, |
harrisso AT email DOT uc DOT edu, shou2 AT juno DOT com | |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: How does OR Will gcc produce assembler output in intel syntax with the new GAS ".intel_syntax" directive |
Date: | Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:52:17 -0500 |
Organization: | Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com |
Message-ID: | <t56f3m8qk544fc@corp.supernews.com> |
References: | <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010103105736 DOT 1129P-100000 AT is> |
X-Priority: | 3 |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-Newsreader: | Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 |
X-Complaints-To: | newsabuse AT supernews DOT com |
Lines: | 45 |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Hold on need, to check for BIFF > /dev/null (How does) if gcc already supports producing intel syntax assembler output and inserts the .intel_syntax directive with the -S flag how would one get it to do this (its obvious it doesn't) otherwise (To the maintainers of binutils) when (Will) gcc support this option? "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote in message news:Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010103105736 DOT 1129P-100000 AT is... > > On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Shawn Harrison wrote: > > > ( gcc -S ) produces AT&T syntax assembler output. > > How does or will gcc produce assembler output in intel syntax with the new > > GAS ".intel_syntax" directive > > I don't think GCC can do that. Yes of course, I know that > > Why do you need this? It makes porting code easier without a lot of unnecessary recoding, plus if its something that can be controlled from inside the C source with the aid of #define 's then the code can be output to other assemblers that are intel syntax'ed by default > If it's to look at the produced code in syntax > you are used to, you can use the objdump utility on the .o file that would be great if I wanted to go from intel to at&t syntax say from a *.s file that was written using the .intel_syntax directive and compiled to an *.o file But its the other way around and you're just back to where you started at. plus thats something gcc will not spawn by default to use in anything useful. > produced by a normal compilation.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |