On Mar 14, 10:49 pm, "Wolfgang Kern" <spamt...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
(Terence)
> >.. It seems Wolfgang has seen this numeric-named register
> > usage syntax elsewhere too; I wasn't sure if this was or was not
> > Herbert's personal syntax. But I didn't come upon it by disassembly,
> > but from correspondance by the authors, modifiers or commentors. I'm
> > sure it isn't the variant Wolfgang mentions.
>
> Yeah, I've seen FPGA/ASIC designers use this notation sometimes.
> I don't remember exact where I saw Numbered Register used first, they
may
> have entered my world from the 16*16 register-matrix using CDP1802 or
any
> other long forgotten single chip, or even from early Motorola-based
tools.
>
> > It's an interesting syntax, but even if registers are interchangeable
> > in usage, it is far easier to have a named reference than a numbered
> > reference, so I propose to quickly write a to-from parser between my
> > preferred ASM reference usage and the rn, sn syntax
>
> Good idea, but be aware to find some different interpretations of
> register-numbers.
> ie: Herbert uses a functional logic for ordering: eax,edx,..
> while I use the given opcode-patterns: eax,ecx,edx... to match PUSHAD
> ...
Ouch!
Good thing you said that, it explains why r1 ~ BX wasn't behaving like
I thought it should..
Ah! Assumptions..
|
