Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:37:16 +0200 From: Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass@teledomenet.gr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Patrick Bowen <pbowen@fastmail.fm> Subject: Re: Assemblers for FreBSD Message-ID: <200703121137.16910.nvass@teledomenet.gr> In-Reply-To: <45F433D1.40802@fastmail.fm> References: <45F433D1.40802@fastmail.fm>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 11 March 2007 18:52, Patrick Bowen wrote: > If one wanted to learn Assembly Language Programming, would he be better > served starting with as(1) or nasm(1)? as(1) is the assembler used in the building procedure, making it your logical choice for operating system programming. It uses the AT&T syntax of UNIX heritage. It understands Intel's syntax as well. Keep in mind that the code in the tree is in AT&T syntax. I guess that must be true for all Unix-like operating systems. Last time I checked, nasm was intel only. I think that nasm mainly served people coming from DOS, people that already knew the Intel syntax. If I was about to try assembly, I would learn AT&T. I think there is more code in Intel syntax though, mainly in the graphics area. It depends on what your purpose is. Operating system programming is dominated by as(1). > Also, are either of those > applicable to AMD64, or just i386? Since as(1) is the only assembler in the tree, and FreeBSD can build itself... as(1) supports many machines... HTH, Nikos
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200703121137.16910.nvass>