4 ms·
Not really. Intel vs AT&T syntax is about how to generate machine code from mnemonics. Cooperation with the linker comes with other directives and options. gas
by throwawaylinux 4y ago
Not really. Intel vs AT&T syntax is about how to generate machine code from mnemonics.
Cooperation with the linker comes with other directives and options. gas has tight cooperation with GNU ld via directives (which mostly are just implemented with ELF constructs AFAIK), not instruction syntax. It can actually be set to accept either AT&T or Intel syntax, without losing any support for other features.
- JonChesterfield 4y agoThe case that comes to mind was emitting a (correct) relocation for one mode and raising an error for the other. That was more likely to be llvm-mc than gas though, so results from on assembler may not apply to all assemblers.
- throwawaylinux 4y agoEmitting a relocation with .reloc directive? Definitely sounds like an llvm-as bug.
- JonChesterfield 4y agoNo, it was an arithmetic expression related to labels. And yes I'd agree that it working in... I want to say intel and not at&t (might be the other way around) is a bug/missing feature. Didn't bother fixing or reporting it at the time though.