Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax (2001)

cs.mcgill.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax (2001)

#111

Post by Taniwha »

bbanyc wrote: post #92
Taniwha wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure all this predates the existence of gas

Only slightly. System V/386 was 1987, first release of GAS was 1989 (and GCC got 386 support in 1988)

Intel format was pre-unix (probably 8080) ... and AT&T of course was from the late 70s, originally from PDPs

Re: AT&T Syntax versus Intel Syntax (2001)

#112

Post by stevekemp »

yakaccount4 wrote: post #33
aap_ wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much agreed. Intel syntax just seems somewhat alien.

That's interesting. My entire world revolves around x86 and ARM, so "Intel" syntax (which to me mostly means op dest, src) is what seems normal to me.

I started with Z80, and later moved to X86. To me intel order is the correct order, and everything else is weird and wrong!
Post reply on HN