On Sep 12, 2002, Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Speaking of good interface design, I have to say I admire gas's > comment syntax:
> Anything from the "line comment" character to the next newline is > considered a comment and is ignored. The line comment character > is [...] on [...] > I realize there are historical reasons but it's still amusing. Not only historical. It's not gas that determines that assembler syntax. It rather follows the practice established by architecture developer, sometimes even attempting to be compatible with other assemblers that target the same architecture. Even when full compatibility is not possible, sometimes characters used for comments on one architecture have different syntactical roles in another. Unless gas chose to break some assemblers, it couldn't pick a single comment character. -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
