From: The Utz Family <utz@serv.net>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@zembu.com>
Cc: dh@ctechnologies.se, ecos-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: [ECOS] Macro problems in arm-elf-as
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 14:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02.9906151430310.3393-100000@itchy.serv.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19990615164519.8787.qmail@daffy.airs.com>
ouch! :-(
how is this really *supposed* to work then?
completely OTOH....
could somebody work arounds this by preprocessing? comments get stripped
prior to compilation, so if somebody were to preprocess this independent
of as and the feed it to as after processing ( assuming that there is a
flag that tells as that it will be receiving predigested input ).....
i am really out on a limb here because i dont understand fully the process
that as uses to get from memnonics and pseudo-ops to something that
actually gets used to emit code.
my other tremendously lame suggestion is to go in and hack the code to
turn off comment processing in the parser and not use any comments ( thats
pure heresy to me, but it doesnt mean that you couln't have the comments
in the checked in copy for now, and then just strip them with a perl
script or something...... )
On 15 Jun 1999, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 13:25:38 +0200
> From: Dan Hovang <dh@ctechnologies.se>
>
> It seems like the arm-elf-as macro routines are broken. Following
> code works in cygwin32 as aswell as in binutils-2.9.1 compiled under
> RedHat Linux 6.0, but not in arm-elf-as as in ecosSWtools-arm-990321.
>
> .macro test, t1, t2
> .int \t1
> label\@:
> .int \t2
> .endm
>
> test 1, 2
> test 3, 4
> test 5, 6
>
> bash-2.02$ arm-elf-as test.S -o test
> test.S: Assembler messages:
> test.S:8: Error: bad instruction `label\'
> test.S:9: Error: bad instruction `label\'
> test.S:10: Error: bad instruction `label\'
>
> I've browsed some sources in the ecosSWtools and compared them against
> binutils (read.c and macro.c) but I've not been able to locate the
> problem. Any ideas, anyone?
>
> The problem is that `@' is the comment character for ARM assembly
> code. That takes precedence over the special meaning of `\@' in a
> macro. The third line in your test case is being seen as just
> `label\'. The `@' and everything following it are being treated as a
> comment.
>
> I unfortunately don't have any clever suggestions.
>
> Ian
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-06-15 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-06-15 4:26 Dan Hovang
1999-06-15 9:45 ` Ian Lance Taylor
1999-06-15 14:40 ` The Utz Family [this message]
1999-06-15 15:18 ` Ian Lance Taylor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.BSF.4.02.9906151430310.3393-100000@itchy.serv.net \
--to=utz@serv.net \
--cc=dh@ctechnologies.se \
--cc=ecos-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com \
--cc=ian@zembu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).