Summary: asm fadd; accepted, but generates code for faddp.
Keywords: accepts-invalid, wrong-code
Discovered in LDC/DMD consistency comparisons.
is accepted, but I don't think it should be. The AMD and Intel manuals don't
mention it, they only have
DMD's behaviour _is_ what DOS "debug" does, but it's error prone and confusing
-- why isn't fadd; the same as fadd ST, ST(1); How the heck did it become faddp
The bare forms without 'p' and with no arguments should simply be made illegal.