[LLVMdev] Intel vs. AT&T Assembly.

[Jeff Cohen]

We know.  Someone offered to do the Intel version, but did little more 
than a huge cut and paste of the AT&T version and then lost interest.  
No one else has had the time or inclination to finish the (barely begun) 
job.  Patches accepted :)

Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi,
>
>   
>> It's a long way towards it:
>>
>>     # AT&T.                      # Intel.
>>             .text                        .text
>>             .align  16                   .align  16
>>             .globl  main                 .globl  main
>>                                          .type   main, @function
>>     main:                        main:
>>             subl $12, %esp               sub esp, 12
>>             fnstcw 10(%esp)              fnstcw word ptr [esp + 10]
>>             movb $2, 11(%esp)            mov byte ptr [esp + 11], 2
>>             fldcw 10(%esp)               fldcw word ptr [esp + 10]
>>             movl 20(%esp), %eax          mov eax, dword ptr [esp + 20]
>>             movl 4(%eax), %eax           mov eax, dword ptr [eax + 4]
>>     
>
> Whoops.  I've provided my post-processed version of lli's Intel output
> which, since I removed the `%' and lowered the `DWORD PTR' isn't a good
> example.  Still, you get the gist;  there are already significant
> differences between the two.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Ralph.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20060429/f8fc076a/attachment.html>