3 ms·
> As someone who has both written and read a lot of assembly in a professional context, my colleagues who are assembly writers very frequently prefer Intel synt
by trealira 2y ago
> As someone who has both written and read a lot of assembly in a professional context, my colleagues who are assembly writers very frequently prefer Intel syntax. The ones who are mostly (exclusively) readers seem to generally prefer AT&T. It is pretty undisputed that AT&T is easier for computers to parse, but it's also generally easier for humans to parse when reading it.
Wow, that surprises me. Without knowing anything, I would think it were the other way around, because in Intel syntax, the address calculation is more explicit than the comma-and-parentheses form; the registers don't require a % sign every time, making it distracting to read the code; and the opcodes are easier to read out loud because they lack the suffixes.
- rep_lodsb 2y agoI suspect it's just a different culture. People coming from UNIX and C learn from tutorials that use AT&T syntax, and probably would never think of writing code in assembly to begin with.