From: mschulter AT  DOT value DOT net (M. Schulter)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Differences between AT&T and x86 assembly language
Date: 20 Aug 1997 22:34:59 GMT
Organization: Value Net Internetwork Services Inc.
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <5tfrej$lgh$1@vnetnews.value.net>
References: <01bcad11$034f28e0$7f5392cf AT default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: value.net
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Travis (TravisWG AT worldnet DOT att DOT net) wrote:

: Hi,  I have heard that the assembler that comes with DJGPP is an
: AT&T version and that it is somewhat different than intel x86 
: assembly language.  Could you please tell me any noticable 
: differences and elaborate as much as possible.  

Fortunately, the DJGPP documentation covers these points in considerable
detail.

First, you'll want to look at the DJGPP FAQ, Section 17.1 in version,
which discusses some differences between AT&T and Intel syntax.

Also, please see the documentation for GAS, the GNU assembler.
With my version of the docs in Info format,

info as machine i386 i386-syntax

takes me right to the relevant section.

Also, fortunately, there are some people here who program in assembler --
and more specifically in DJGPP 32-bit protected mode assembler, which has
some conventions you need to follow in order to meet protected mode
requireements.

Most respectfully,

Margo Schulter
mschulter AT value DOT net

(To reply, please remove the extra . in my default address)