> Unfortunately, the documentation on legal syntax is absolutely terrible. I totally agree. Determining the semantics of wierd assembly is even harder. At leas

> Unfortunately, the documentation on legal syntax is absolutely terrible. I totally agree. Determining the semantics of wierd assembly is even harder. At least for syntax you can just see confirm if gnu-as accepts it. > Did I miss anything else? I haven't looked into what is actually parsing at all, but it correctly accepts things like %hi, strings delimited by quotes, @function, labels that are just numbers. I had expected some of those to be rejects based on the post. I don't know what else might fail because I can't try any auto generated code because of the period label issue. I would recommend trying the assembly generated by compiling this project; it shows a bunch of weird pieces of syntax.