www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - in-line assembler...

reply "Richard Krehbiel" <rich kastle.com> writes:
Several thoughts - keeping in mind that, though I've done IBM S/360, Zilog
Z80, Motorola 6809, 68K, 6805, DEC PDP-11, and VAX-11 assembly language,
I've never touched Intel x86:

SSE?  SSE2?  3DNow?  From a purely practical perspective, these are some of
the more compelling reasons to use the assembler at all, since there are no
compiler features to access them.  (You can target D's native double float
type at SSE2 "scalar" instructions - and this would be a good idea - but you
probably wouldn't touch the "packed" instructions.)

The semantics of the "$" special identifier: it should refer to the
*current* instruction, not the *following* instruction.  "jmp $" should be
an infinite loop.  Or does Intel specify $ that way?  They're unique if so.

I think I'd add to the language spec that the inline assembler is
standardised, but an implementation may omit it - else you're going to have
a great deal of trouble with "dfront."

--
Richard Krehbiel, Arlington, VA, USA
rich kastle.com (work) or krehbiel3 comcast.net  (personal)
Feb 27 2002
next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Richard Krehbiel" <rich kastle.com> wrote in message
news:a5invb$tcv$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 SSE?  SSE2?  3DNow?  From a purely practical perspective, these are some


of

 the more compelling reasons to use the assembler at all, since there are


no

 compiler features to access them.  (You can target D's native double float
 type at SSE2 "scalar" instructions - and this would be a good idea - but


you

 probably wouldn't touch the "packed" instructions.)


Yeah, I should add the extended instructions. I just wanted to make sure the
basic ones worked.


 The semantics of the "$" special identifier: it should refer to the
 *current* instruction, not the *following* instruction.  "jmp $" should be
 an infinite loop.  Or does Intel specify $ that way?  They're unique if


so.

That's the way it's usually done with the x86.


 I think I'd add to the language spec that the inline assembler is
 standardised, but an implementation may omit it - else you're going to


have

 a great deal of trouble with "dfront."


dfront isn't going to support inline assembler, so I do need to fix that.
Feb 27 2002
parent "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5j64b$145f$1 digitaldaemon.com...


 The semantics of the "$" special identifier: it should refer to the
 *current* instruction, not the *following* instruction.  "jmp $" should




be

 an infinite loop.  Or does Intel specify $ that way?  They're unique if


 so.

 That's the way it's usually done with the x86.


I'm not sure for MASM/TASM (didn't use 'em), but NASM specifies
$ as current instruction.


 I think I'd add to the language spec that the inline assembler is
 standardised, but an implementation may omit it - else you're going to


 have

 a great deal of trouble with "dfront."


 dfront isn't going to support inline assembler, so I do need to fix that.


Maybe something like "the implementation should either support
asm-blocks according to the specification for a specific architecture,
or stop compilation, displaying an error, 'inline assembler not supported'"?
Feb 27 2002
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Richard Krehbiel" <rich kastle.com> wrote in message
news:a5invb$tcv$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 SSE?  SSE2?  3DNow?  From a purely practical perspective, these are some


of

 the more compelling reasons to use the assembler at all, since there are


no

 compiler features to access them.  (You can target D's native double float
 type at SSE2 "scalar" instructions - and this would be a good idea - but


you

 probably wouldn't touch the "packed" instructions.)


Ok, the SSE and SSE2 instructions are now implemented in the inline
assembler.

www.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip
Mar 06 2002
parent reply "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a64ppe$rud$1 digitaldaemon.com...


 www.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip


I believe the correct URL is ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip -
at least that's where I've got it (and your link brought me
to the "resource not found" page).
Mar 07 2002
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a68nq1$6im$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:a64ppe$rud$1 digitaldaemon.com...


 www.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip


 I believe the correct URL is ftp://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip -
 at least that's where I've got it (and your link brought me
 to the "resource not found" page).


You're correct. Thanks!
Mar 07 2002