From:	"John S. Fine" <johnfine AT erols DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: assembly newsgroup?
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:33:19 -0500
Lines:	33
Message-ID:	<369CCACF.70B0@erols.com>
References:	<19990113005048 DOT 28680 DOT 00003768 AT ng22 DOT aol DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	5Fl9+PGpwuW5EAmDQxd5XQlEGnXQ1tPdWuFkOC7BVpg=
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT rcn DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date:	13 Jan 1999 16:34:28 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; U)
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Mr Todd T wrote:

> Can anyone point me to a newsgroup where I could ask questions about converting
> inline Intel assembly to inline assembly with Djgpp?

  You are already in the right newsgroup.  This question is also
frequently asked in comp.lang.asm.x86, but gets more answers
here.

  The usual answers are:

  Read section 17.2 of the DJGPP FAQ (about automated
conversion).

or
  Convert the code to a whole asm module (instead of inline) so you
can use the NASM assembler (which is closer to the Intel syntax you
have now).

or
  Read the following URLs to learn about inline assembly with DJGPP:
http://www.rt.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de/~georg/djgpp/djgpp_asm.html
http://www.castle.net/~avly/djasm.html

BUT
  Regardless of which method you choose, be aware that DJGPP is
a 32-bit protected programming environment, in which offset
addresses are not the same as physical addresses.  If you are
converting from 16-bit real mode, the conversion to protected
mode may be more complicated than the syntax change.
-- 
http://www.erols.com/johnfine/
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/8600/

- Raw text -