Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Nov 1998 19:24:06 -0800 | From | (Mike Stump) | Subject | Re: A patch for linux 2.1.127 |
| |
> From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 12:02:41 +0000 (GMT)
> of course it does - movb, movw, movl, and furthermore because it > follows a cross platform standard I can read non x86 stuff > easily. It took me about 3 days to get the hang of gnu assembler > while writing the original linux/smp boot code
Let me expound on this some. I think we should go farther, and try and set a standard for all assembly languages, and use various subsets of it for most of the instructions on all machines. Doing dissassemblers and assemblers is then just a matter of knowing which subset it is, and doing a compiler port, well, that's still hard, but atleast one part of it is easier.
But, this isn't the real reason to do this, the real one, is to reduce the burden on humans that have to read/write the stuff. Some of the assembly languages I have seen come out of gcc are truly done to merely create job security (because they are so bad).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |