Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler"
From: Herbert Kleebauer (klee_at_unibwm.de)
Date: 08/16/04
- Next message: T.M. Sommers: "Re: From the LuxAsm list."
- Previous message: Alex McDonald: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- In reply to: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Next in thread: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:41:02 +0200
C wrote:
> add ax, bx -> add.w a, b
> mov ax, bx -> mov.w a, b
> mov cs, dx -> mov.sw c, d
ax -> a bx -> b cx -> c dx -> d
bp -> ? si -> ? di -> ? sp -> ?
ah -> ? bh -> ? ch -> ? dh -> ?
Wouldn't it be better to number the registers (r0 - r7) instead
of using different single letter names?
> movzx eax, bl -> mov.db a, b
movsx eax, bl -> ?
This instructions are not simple move instruction and
therefore deserve an own opcode: movs.bd movs.bw movs.wd
muvu.bd movs.bw movs.wd
> movsb -> mov.ab
What is .ab? It is a simple byte move with register indirect
addressing with auto postincrement (postdecrement).
mov.b (r5)+,(r6)+
mov.b (r5)-,(r6)-
- Next message: T.M. Sommers: "Re: From the LuxAsm list."
- Previous message: Alex McDonald: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- In reply to: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Next in thread: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Reply: C: "Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|