[fpc-other] asm ... end;

[Alain Michaud]

so Intel it is...

Thank you so much!

Alain

Tomas Hajny wrote:
> On Wed, April 16, 2008 20:00, Alain Michaud wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>    here is a simple stupid question for experienced programmers:
>>
>> When using the inline assembler instructions (asm), one can chose the
>> "intel" or "ATT" syntax. Which one is the best, more convenient?
> 
> Trying to focus on objective factors (without any ranking - you need to
> decide on their weight for you):
> 
> - AT&T syntax is available on more platforms as far as I know.
> 
> - AT&T syntax is more explicit on e.g. size of operands (you sometimes
> need to guess that from context with Intel syntax).
> 
> - Intel syntax may be better alternative if you need to consider
> interoperability with e.g. Delphi or some other Pascal compilers on x86
> platform.
> 
> - Considering that majority of Pascal programmers these days have some
> background with either TP/BP, Delphi or one of their clones (and these
> usually only support Intel syntax), there are probably more Pascal
> programmers who understand / prefer Intel syntax.
> 
> - If specifically targetting x86 platforms, I believe that there's more
> documentation available for Intel syntax too (including reference and
> optimization documents directly from CPU producers).
> 
> Tomas
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other at lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other