Petr Baudis wrote:
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 07:01:28PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
Which assembler do I pick for i386 and x86_64 ? [snip]
I'm not really familiar with yasm, lzasm or fasm, but I personally use this rule of thumb:
(i) If I have bunch of Intel-syntax assembler source I need to compile, or I need to do something very raw, I use nasm.
(ii) Otherwise, I use gas.
I think these two projects are most likely to never fall out of maintenance and continue gaining support for whatever new architectures and instructions coming by (especially gas is virtually guaranteed to stay alive as long as GNU/Linux does),
Continued support and in particular development would be important for my decision too, yes.
and they are usually installed on any Linux with a development toolchain, so I wonder what compelling advantages the other assemblers have.
I have not yet gathered sufficient experience with any of the others, only TASM (for the i386 platform), but because I might be rewriting many tens-of-thousands lines of code, productivity is important, i.e. I want an assembler that supports more than just the odd function written in assembler.
gas uses very different syntax from what the Intel assembly hackers are used to, but it's worth learning it - you will gain access to assembly of pretty much any architecture out there, you can use the integrated assembly support in gcc, you can read gdb's disass output, etc etc.
Okay, thanks. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-programming+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-programming+help@opensuse.org