[Vm-dev] unit code for new faster bitblt

[Casey Ransberger]

Ouch. Okay we *are* in fact looking at the difference between Intel (asasm)
and AT&T (gas [also, yuck]) syntax.

If there isn't that much asm code, we can translate it by hand. If there's
a whole lot of it, maybe it would be more productive to try to parse out
the AST and then pretty print it out to AT&T syntax. Macros might make that
really hard, though.


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:03 PM, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 24-06-2013, at 5:53 PM, Casey Ransberger <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Is it minor variance in syntax or are we talking the difference between
> at&t and intel assembler? How much assembly code is there? I wasn't able to
> find anything on this asasm, can you point me at something?
>
> It turns out (I had no idea that it even existed, I've never made use of
> the root project) that it is part of the gcc-for-RISC OS project. There is
> a linux version (obviously, or I wouldn't have had the problem) which I was
> given along with the blt sources.
>
> With no experience in using `gas` I can't really even guess at what the
> differences might be, though at least the actual instructions must surely
> be the same! Although, given the way of the world, maybe not. For an
> example, here is the asm file for the x11 helper routine, written for the
> same asasm tool
>
>
>
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Oxymorons: Sweet sorrow
>
>
>
>


-- 
Casey Ransberger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20130624/52851590/attachment.htm