From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: [OT] Assembly language syntax,
 was: Re: A question about syntax or semantics
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 15:50:14 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lyy4xz3zvd.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <ll8peq$96q$1@speranza.aioe.org>
	<CbVdv.2039585$pa5.172930@fx23.iad> <ly38g75pmp.fsf@pushface.org>
	<llagp9$ova$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="942b5624700b15f09a730d9ed9406bd7";
	logging-data="27657"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19sorZah57jLQxSWn6XGhJOPLB5JAnETs0="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HPWNImFbqFshdkZkveFHubZx9ec=
	sha1:VX9yFx+XUklQtf1qxSL4U8M3lzE=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:19878
Date: 2014-05-18T15:50:14+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> On 2014-05-18, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> wrote:
>>
>> Well, considering the various assembler languages around, I'd still
>> be confused but for different reasons: given "mov r0,r1" does r1
>> receive the value in r0 (which is what I'd expect, my first encounter
>> with a 'normal' assembler having been MACRO-32) or does r0 receive
>> the value in r1?
>
> On ARM, with the binutils assembler, it's the other way around.

Um, I mentioned both possibilities.

> BTW, "mov src, dest" versus "mov dest, src" is an attribute of the
> assembler in use, not the architecture.

Yes.

> A very good example would be the gas versus Intel syntax for x86.
> Same architecture, different assembler syntax.

Yes.

You've made the point I was trying to make rather more clearly than I
managed to, I think!