News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax. Parent comment

Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by userbinator on Sunday November 13, 2022 @03:44PM (#33587145)
That is extremely confusing for comparisons, which are effectively a subtraction.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by mixmastamyk on Sunday November 13, 2022 @08:31PM (#33589261)
I’m talking about moves and copies.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by int_19h on Sunday November 13, 2022 @08:43PM (#33589340)
It's even more confusing if moves have a different operation order from arithmetic ops and comparisons, no?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by mixmastamyk on Monday November 14, 2022 @01:50AM (#33590905)
No, each should have what makes sense, whether analogous to math or a shell command.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by int_19h on Monday November 14, 2022 @03:25AM (#33591458)
This implies that dst<-src "doesn't make sense"; but then why does practically every programming language use this ordering?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax by mixmastamyk on Monday November 14, 2022 @12:13PM (#33597320)
A minor historical mistake/misdesign around the equals sign. Looks like algebra but fundamentally different.
[ Parent | on HN ]