Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!iuvax!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!urbsdc!aglew From: aglew@urbsdc.Urbana.Gould.COM Newsgroups: comp.sys.att Subject: Re: /bin/as (now gcc) Message-ID: <31200024@urbsdc> Date: 20 Jun 88 23:05:00 GMT References: <734@naucse.UUCP> Lines: 12 Nf-ID: #R:naucse.UUCP:734:urbsdc:31200024:000:548 Nf-From: urbsdc.Urbana.Gould.COM!aglew Jun 20 18:05:00 1988 >> mov.w L2-L1(%pc,%d0.w),%d0 >> ^^^^^ >Alex, this looks just like the code gcc produces. AMAZING! :^) >If you are tring to get gcc-1.22 up just replace the L2-L1 >(or any labels they may happen to be) with the magic number ten. (i.e. 10) This worries me a little bit. I have at least some hope of running a code rearranger on the assembly output; the move statement for switch is exactly the sort of thing that you might want to rearrange, except for the explicit constant. Not that code scheduling makes much difference on a 68010 anyway...