asm satori

I wish to achieve satoro for x86 and MIPS. To where shall I go for excellent documentation of assembly instructions languages techniques and practices?

But I don't know what you could mean shiichan, I don't post threads often at all. Perhaps you don't want me to post at all? Hopefully this extra line of text will convince you.

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/architectures-software-developer-manuals.html

MIPS is not worth much study. Once you know x86 you'll find it boring and limited. You can memorise all you need to know in less than an hour. Ditto for ARM.

no

>>2
MIPS is not worth much study.
Really? I studied MIPS in college. Built a MIPS emulator and even implemented a MIPS CPU in Logisim.

Also, if you actually ever had to write ASM, say, for instance, to program an embedded device, you're more likely to be writing for MIPS than x86.

Not to mention x86 has an abundance of C compilers that produce much better code than human written ASM.

>>2
And those are good things.

>>2
Intel is Jewish.

>>6
Your mom is Jewish.

>>4
Colleges like using MIPS because it's so simple even the most braindead of students should be able to figure it out.

Not to mention x86 has an abundance of C compilers that produce much better code than human written ASM.
If by "abundance" you mean one, Intel's compiler, you'd be correct... gcc is horrible, MSVC is much better, I can easily beat both of them on size/speed/both, Intel's is a more worthy opponent.

For MIPS and other RISCs, compilers are better value since there just isn't much to optimise at the instruction level. Fewer instructions is always going to be faster and smaller since they all execute in a single cycle or so.

>>4
Colleges like using MIPS because it's so simple even the most braindead of students should be able to figure it out.

Not to mention x86 has an abundance of C compilers that produce much better code than human written ASM.
If by "abundance" you mean one, Intel's compiler, you'd be correct... gcc is horrible, MSVC is much better, I can easily beat both of them on size/speed/both, Intel's is a more worthy opponent.

For MIPS and other RISCs, compilers are better value since there just isn't much to optimise at the instruction level. Fewer instructions is always going to be faster and smaller since they all execute in a single cycle or so.

>>7
No.

http://www.intel.com/cd/corporate/europe/emea/heb/290083.htm
The Company, founded in 1974 in Haifa with five employees, today employs more than 7,800 people, in addition to indirectly impacting the employment of 23,000 workers in Israel. These large numbers bring with them great responsibility to maintain business leadership, economic stability and employment fairness.

>>8>>9
cudder went crazy.

those intel manuals are pretty incomprehensible.

>>8
Colleges like using MIPS because it's so simple even the most braindead of students should be able to figure it out.
Or because, like I said, one can easily learn MIPS and implement an emulator in C and a CPU in Logisim all in the span of one semester, as I was instructed to do, which leads to a better rounded education than learning x86 ASM for the sake of learning x86 ASM, which in and of itself is no more intellectually rewarding than washing dishes.

I can easily beat both of them on size/speed/both
I've been here for quite a while Cudder. I'm quite familiar with your feeble attempts at writing code, as it's been a source of great amusement for me over the years. I can't decide as to whose worse between you and FrozenVoid. So please reserve your bullshit for somebody who can't smell it from a mile away.

>>8,9
Thanks for finally admitting that x86 is an inelegant pile of shite that defies efficient machine code generation. Thank god the new Medfield Atoms are finally killing off worst and oldest parts of the ISA.

>>12
AMD's are better. I shudder now to think what life will be like if they fold and there is no one left to produce decent x86 manuals.

I thought that PowerPC and ARM were the only ones worth reading. MIPS sure if great for teaching and advancement, but heck, making custom chips is better. I hate Jazelle although.

Ah OP:
http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/man/10/2c.html
http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/man/10/2a.html

>>15
A correct way to deal with yacc(10.1) grammars.

Oh fuck me.

>>1
Thanks you cudder-sama. Why are the rest of you so mean?

>>15
Thank you, but I am interested in writing the assembly myself. But I will read on cross compilation under plan9 at a later date.

Power Architecture (PowerPC) is MIPS plus Altivec.

>>18
Wrong! All wrong!
Plus, Altivec is only implemented in the Motorola G4 and IBM G5. IHBT

>>18,19
PowerPC is more like the 68K on acid.

>>20
AaaaaaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHh!!!!!