> On Tue, 10 Nov 1998, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > It is thoretically possible to convert correct code to GNU `as` junk,
> > however, the damn thing doesn't even do MACROs so if I am going to
> > make:
> > adc eax, [ebx+1000]
> > adc eax, [ebx+996]
> > adc eax, [ebx+992]
>
> How about:
>
[SNIPPED {wish it were true} code]
It would be nice if a compiler would unroll a "phony" loop as you
showed into a nice instruction stream that sat, unconnected in
the current code segment and you could index into that instruction
sequence. But that's not 'C' . A MACRO assembler would do just that
(and more).
>
> That's why they have movb, movw, and movl et. al.
But that's not Intel code! A lot of persons don't understand this.
Maybe I could explain. Lets say you were a master at the English
Language. You had a great vocabulary and could write excellent
prose. You were published in English Literature world-wide.
You set out to write a short story. Unfortunately, it was for
a French magazine. Although you knew something about French,
all that you had learned about English and how to communicate
with its many variations could not be used.
You would have to become a French Scholar first. You do not
have the time.
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.1.127 on an i586 machine (66.15 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/