Re: A patch for linux 2.1.127

[rich_paul at bigfoot dot com]

I shall stand corrected on that point then, and restate that rather than
railing against gas for not accepting MASM of TASM syntax, one should
either write a preprocessor to convert the input, or use M4/cpp, or just
get a tool that speaks the dialect that you're familiar with.

Thanks for correcting me there ...  I sure wish I could find some high
level documents to describe egcs, because the basic assumption that the
output of egcs was the same regardless of platform coloured my thinking
about egcs.  Is there such a document?

--------
Where do you want to crash, toady?
On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Joe Buck wrote:

> 
> > I let me say up front that I've never done assembly language under Linux...
> 
> Yes, it shows.
> 
> > My comment about speed was really about control, my understanding was that
> > gas syntax was not tailored to the 80x86, and therefore there were some
> > problems with dropped registers and such.  This was inferred from reading
> > this thread, and may have been incorrectly inferred ... 
> 
> Yes, your inference was incorrect.
> 
> > The point I was trying to make, though, was that gas was a tool that
> > speaks one language,
> 
> But you are mistaken on this basic point.  gas does not have a "language"
> that limits you.  It does not cause a "loss of control" or "dropped
> registers" (unless, say, a processor maker adds new instructions which
> have not yet been added to gas's opcode tables ... and this kind of thing
> is not hard to fix).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>