News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on I decided to make a graphics card for my Amiga 2000. Parent comment

Re:I decided to make a graphics card for my Amiga 2000 by wolfgke on Sunday April 17, 2016 @11:18AM (#11514782)
> Intel's syntax is most common, not the AT&T one.

I'd be a little bit more careful with such a statement: Under Windows (and formerly DOS) Intel syntax is the common one, while under GNU/Linux and OSX the AT&T one is used.

> If you translate mov into =, the syntax makes much more sense than AT&T.

Though I prefer the Intel syntax, I'd be careful with "makes sense" here: According to http://stackoverflow.com/a/4119217/497193 people who grew up with MIPS seem to prefer the AT&T syntax since it is much more similar to MIPS assembler.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:I decided to make a graphics card for my Amiga 2000 by pjmlp on Sunday April 17, 2016 @01:50PM (#11515453)
Apparently you missed my second paragraph.

Only UNIX based OSes follow AT&T, for obvious reasons.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:I decided to make a graphics card for my Amiga 2000 by Annatar on Monday April 18, 2016 @09:23AM (#11519674)
It has nothing to do with the operating system. AT & T syntax follows the same style as pretty much any other computer and processor in existence. (Exceptions exist, but they are exotic oddities.)
[ Parent | on HN ]