Gasp. Am I getting old and stupid?

Steven W. Orr steveo at syslang.net
Fri Jul 7 09:30:01 EDT 2006


On Friday, Jul 7th 2006 at 08:30 -0400, quoth Michael ODonnell:

=>
=>
=>>>> Gasp is considered 'obsolete'.  The bintuils-gasp is the only
=>>>> remnant of it, for applications that require it.
=>>>
=>>> Ok, I'll ask the obvoius follow-up question -- obsoleted by what?
=>>> What do use instead if we want to code Assembler with a F/LOSS
=>>> tool-chain?
=>>
=>>
=>>If gcc supports the processor you're targetting you can get a
=>>sense of the assembler support available to you by dummying up
=>>some test code in C and then seeing what gcc emits when asked
=>>to stop translation after the assembler code generation phase.
=>>
=>>Something like this:
=>>
=>>   gcc -S myDummyProgram.c
=>>
=>>...should result in the creation of myDummyProgram.s
=>>
=>>You mentioned the "gnu assembler macro processor" but the only
=>>part of the Gnu tool chain that I ever use for macro processing
=>>is the "standard" preprocessor (whose man page says, "Modern
=>>versions of the GNU assembler have macro facilities"  BTW...)
=>>
=>>In olden days we used m4 for macro processing.  It ain't pretty
=>>but, depending on your purposes, it can be very effective.
=>
=>
=>Oh, and for completeness I probably (duh!) should have suggested:
=>
=>   man as


Umm, gcc -S is in no way related to this question. What any compiler 
produces is never going to want access to a macro processor.

But I did look at the as info pages and it looks like a lot of the macro 
functionality is there. I see .macro .include and .if

Does anyone know what else gasp used to provide that's not here?



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list