[LLVMdev] x86 Intel Syntax and MASM 9.x

[Aaron Gray]

> On Tuesday 16 June 2009 09:48, Aaron Gray wrote:
>
>> Appently the GAS Intel backend has flaws and does not work correctly 
>> anyway
>> so the X86IntelAsm backend is designed only to target MASM anyway.
>
> gas Intel syntax is indeed broken in LLVM.  I'd love to make it work but
> my work has not (yet) allocated time for that.  Maybe I can hack LLVM on
> the weekends.  :)

I think writing an assembler using LLVM Table gen and data, and using the 
DOCE (Direct Object Code Emission) backends (see LLVM Wiki for details) when 
they are ready is a much better solution. I am planning on doing a full tool 
set (linker, and librarian anyway) to replace binutils for LLVM on Windows, 
and maybe for other bianry formats. Although this will take time, hopefully 
we will get more people working on it when there is something basic running 
as a proof of concept.

> The above discussion leads me to believe there are fundamental conflicts
> between MASM and gas syntax.
>
> Is NASM any better than MASM?

Probably if MASM does not support aligns or weak symbols properly.

> I would hate for MASM to impose draconian restrictions on the Intel asm
> printer for all targets.

Yes.

> Do we need a third asm printer?

I think so.

Aaron