Re: [Nasm-devel] Xeon Phi

[H. P. A. <hp...@zy...>]

On 09/25/2012 03:40 AM, anonymous coward wrote:
>
> However, support for parentheses around an
> operand (as suggested by #327364-001 3.5)
> is tricky: for reg ops the parentheses simply
> evaluate, but for mem ops the parser has to
> explicitly skip them -- however, that decision
> hinges on the leading transform modifier and
> there is no clear reg versus mem distinction,
> because of the D(...) down converts: they do
> use reg ops, but with mem transforms.
>
> I have not decided the most suitable course
> yet -- add extra parse-ahead to find '[', parse
> down convert instructions specially, or, well,
> ignore Intel's suggested syntax (i.e. no (...),
> and permit all modifiers before and after any
> operand, reg or mem [with subsequent tests
> for their sanity/validity, of course]).
>
Hi...

Cyrill and I looked at this last night, and we're not entirely sure what 
you mean.  Our thinking has been to treat braced keywords simply as a 
separate keyword space, which would mean a slightly looser syntax but 
probably okay.  I seriously did not follow the big about parens, though...

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.