This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: m68k - Dropping the Motorola syntax


> On Monday 18 August 2003 13:42, Gunther Nikl wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 05:14:24PM +0200, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
> > >
> > >  No way, I've always wanted to drop the Motorola syntax because it's
> > > used only by a few non-mainstream targets. But you're the second person
> > > pointing it out, so maybe I've not explained myself clearly :-)
> > >
> > >  sources.redhat.com seems to be down right now, but *should* be the
> > > correct link to my initial argument:
> > >
> > >    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-07/msg00390.html
> >
> >   I have read it again and no, there you are suggesting to remove MIT
> >   assembler syntax.
> 
> Oh. I must have been on drugs or something when I wrote that!
> Please forgive me, I'm usually much more coherent than that :-)
> 
> ...and I couldn't even check before posting because of that
> sever outage. Argh!
> 
> 
> >     MIT: movel a6@(4),d0
> >     MOT: move.l 4(a6),d0
> >
> >   Now which one is the syntax that you want to get rid off?
> 
> Of course I meant to remove the least used one, which is...
> err... mumble mumble... the MIT syntax :-)

Please don't drop it. We have 8000 lines of handwritten "movel"-style m68k
assembler, which is part of some legacy products that we still support.
(They use m68k-aout-gcc.)

-- 
Don


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]