Hi Iain Iain Sandoe <idsan...@googlemail.com> wrote: >Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@arm.com> wrote: >> "Qian, Jianhua" <qia...@cn.fujitsu.com> writes: >>> Hi Richard >>> >>> I found that some instructions are using '#' before immediate value， >>> and others are not. For example >>> (define_insn "insv_imm<mode>" >>> [(set (zero_extract:GPI (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "+r") >>> >>> >>> (match_operand:GPI 2 "const_int_operand" "n"))] "UINTVAL >>> (operands[1]) < GET_MODE_BITSIZE (<MODE>mode) >>> && UINTVAL (operands[1]) % 16 == 0" >>> "movk\\t%<w>0, %X2, lsl %1" >>> [(set_attr "type" "mov_imm")] >>> ) >>> >>> Are there any standards for this? >> >> No, it's unfortunately inconsistent. FWIW, if we were going to change >> this, personally I've a slight preference for having the “#”. > >Absence of the # makes assemblers based on the LLVM backend reject GCC’s >output, as such I’ve got a strong preference for adding it (I’ve got some >local patches for this already). >e.g. >https://github.com/iains/gcc-darwin-arm64/commit/526ffb6b34ddb848853016cd14a438683aa0e6de
That's good, we are of the same mind.. Regards Qian
