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.