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...