Re: from elsewhere, an assembler

"cr88192" <cr88192@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:eeee8$46158762$ca83a8d6$5807@xxxxxxxxxx:


"SpooK" <keith@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1175814923.422411.258600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 5, 5:45 pm, "cr88192" <cr88...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
any comments?...

Comments??? Evidently not, if the semi-colon is being used in an HLL-
like manner :P


the semicolon is space-sensitive so:
push ebp; mov ebp, esp

is parsed as 2 instuctions (the semicolon is regarded as a seperator
here).

however:
push ebp ;mov ebp, esp

is parsed as a single instruction followed by a comment.

basically, if any whitespace comes before the semicolon, it is treated
as a comment (whitespace afterwards makes no difference).



potentially this is confusing, but personally I don't think it is a
major issue.

at first it was unsettling as well, but at the time I opted with
C-style comments /* ... */ and //...

after I thought up the whitespace trick, I can do both line globbing
and more traditional comments.

I have to second Spook, here. ';' has been the traditional char
for comments, and there is no reason for modifying this. Also,
in order to resist to the natural babelism tendancies, it would
be a good thing to do the same choices, the other Author have
done, when this is without any importance. The only Assembler
i know about, which enables with multi-Instructions-lines is
RosAsm, and it syntax is:

mov eax ebx | mov edx 0 | div ecx

Unless it would be a problem for your parser to make a difference
with an expression, why not doing the same choice?


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >





.

Relevant Pages