Xref: utzoo comp.arch:5938 comp.software-eng:737
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ncar!noao!nud!anasaz!john
From: john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: using (ugh!  yetch!) assembler
Message-ID: <1163@anasaz.UUCP>
Date: 5 Aug 88 17:36:26 GMT
References: <60859@sun.uucp> <474@m3.mfci.UUCP> <2926@utastro.UUCP> <37014@linus.UUCP> <9763@eddie.MIT.EDU> <37247@linus.UUCP> <1148@anasaz.UUCP> <1988Aug2.231433.25760@utzoo.uucp> <11719@steinmetz.ge.com>
Reply-To: john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore)
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ
Lines: 16

In article <11719@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
%
%  One of the claimed advantages of assembler is that you can't get
%burned by changes in the compiler causing bad code. Unfortunately
%assemblers do generate bad code, too, on occasion. One example was the
%GMAP assembler for the GE600. Certain instructions mush be in odd
%locations, such as RPD, and in some cases that was not forced. I think
%it was if the RPD was the result of the expansion of a macro or
%something, but it was 20+ years ago.
There was some sort of pseudo-op to force that, I think... (been about 17
years for me)
-- 
John Moore (NJ7E)           {decvax, ncar, ihnp4}!noao!nud!anasaz!john
(602) 861-7607 (day or eve) {gatech, ames, rutgers}!ncar!...
The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be
someone else's.