Re: Question about jumps
- From: "Eman" <e!m!a!n@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:24:41 +0400
"Herbert Kleebauer" <klee@xxxxxxxxx> ???????/???????? ? ????????:
Windela/Lindela is exactly such a product and
was never designed to be used by somebody else.
If so, there is no point to show this syntax to somebody else.
But it shouldn't be
a problem to understand code posted in this syntax, because it is
only pure CPU instructions (no assembler specific macros or
compile time language).
Your suffixes are quite self-explanatory (just a cumbersome-ness), but the numbered registers are awkward. Since registers in Intel
architecture are far from equality in their rights and usage it's much better to distinguish them by names.
And if I have to suffer when reading this awful Intel syntax, then other also can suffer when reading the
clear and logical 68k syntax.
The vengeance is not a fruitful business ;)
.
- References:
- Question about jumps
- From: Markus Pitha
- Re: Question about jumps
- From: Evenbit
- Re: Question about jumps
- From: Evenbit
- Re: Question about jumps
- From: Herbert Kleebauer
- Re: Question about jumps
- From: Evenbit
- Re: Question about jumps
- From: Herbert Kleebauer
- Question about jumps
- Prev by Date: Re: Question about jumps
- Next by Date: Re: Question about jumps
- Previous by thread: Re: Question about jumps
- Next by thread: Re: Question about jumps
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|