From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 MIME-version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Brantley Coile In-reply-to: Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 07:24:49 -0500 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: References: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] FP register usage in Plan9 assembler Topicbox-Message-UUID: 827797dc-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Which plan 9 assembler uses right to left argument assignments, or compare a= rgument order? I was not aware of inconsistency in syntax between assemblers= .=20 Maybe there is confusion between the use, in the different posts, between th= e macro architecture and the versions of the assembler, referred to as archi= tecture.=20 Or the confusion is about what Plan 9 is meant to be. The idea was to have a= single system made of many different machines of a diverse set of architect= ures. A single system would have a single assembly language. The architectur= es are still different, but as much as possible the accidental differences b= etween the assembly languages of the processor manufacturers are eliminated.= The idea is not just to be a cross compiling system for embedded targets or= is it to be a single machine system that ran on different hardware, but to b= e a single system running on a cloud of machines, to borrow some marketing j= argon. To that end, the Plan 9 syntax is fine for teaching assembler. And so doing,= a person is better able to write good C code. The only disadvantage is when= learning the assembler one has to translate front the manufacturer's docume= ntation and the Plan 9 standard syntax.=20 Brantley Coile Sent from my iPad > On Feb 4, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Aram H=C4=83v=C4=83rneanu wrot= e: >=20 >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:24 PM, erik quanstrom wr= ote: >> i love the consistency from one architecture to another. >=20 > Just like how different architectures use different order for CMP > arguments. Very consistent. >=20 > Or just how some architectures use typed registers, and some use > different-sized instruction variants. >=20 > Or just how most instructions use left-to-right dataflow order, some > instructions use right-to-left. >=20 > I could go on. Plan 9 assembly is nice because it looks mostly the > same, and the simple addressing modes are mostly consistent, but it's > far from being really consistent between architectures. >=20 > --=20 > Aram H=C4=83v=C4=83rneanu >=20