Sender: bill AT taniwha DOT tssc DOT co DOT nz
Message-ID: <36F759DE.66F01BC@taniwha.tssc.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 21:07:42 +1200
From: Bill Currie <bill AT taniwha DOT tssc DOT co DOT nz>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.3 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: djasm shift semi bug + proposal
References: <36F5CF26 DOT AEED9A67 AT taniwha DOT tssc DOT co DOT nz> <199903221509 DOT KAA00687 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <36F69D7F DOT 25F23B74 AT taniwha DOT tssc DOT co DOT nz> <199903221957 DOT OAA32392 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > src/stub/stub.asm  shr/shl only
> > tests/libc/crt0/teststub.asm  shr/shl only
> 
> OK.  I'm still nervous about having an opcode with such a vague
> meaning.  Maybe we can recognize its misuse and issue a suitable
> error.

Are you refering to my sh[lr]dl?  If so, I'm willing to change it again
(it's most likely only my lfn code that uses it), so the name is up for
discussion.

> > Thought so, though I'd been under the impression you've given up on
> > djlink (hence the question).
> 
> It's still there, and it tries to follow the OMF spec.  My point is
> that if something as esoteric as djasm is going to support OMF, it
> might as well be compatible with an esoteric linker :-)

Oh, I agree!  If djgpp is going to have an OMF linker (even if generally
unused), it needs an OMF assembler.  Hmm, then gcc will need to be able
to output for djasm (even though you started on nasm support)...
sometime next millenium:)

Bill
-- 
Leave others their otherness.