-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix more minor typos #90086
Fix more minor typos #90086
Conversation
Also, the Unsupported Register table should mention that LLVM reserves `rbx` (as noted in a previous PR I filed tonight.)
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @GuillaumeGomez (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
|
||
As a consequence, you should only use GNU assembler **numeric** [local labels] inside inline assembly code. Defining symbols in assembly code may lead to assembler and/or linker errors due to duplicate symbol definitions. | ||
|
||
Moreover, on x86 when using the default intel syntax, due to [an llvm bug], you shouldn't use labels exclusively made of `0` and `1` digits, e.g. `0`, `11` or `101010`, as they may end up being interpreted as binary values. Using `options(att_syntax)` will avoid any ambiguity, but that affects the syntax of the _entire_ `asm!` block. | ||
Moreover, on x86 when using the default Intel syntax, due to [an LLVM bug], you shouldn't use labels exclusively made of `0` and `1` digits, e.g. `0`, `11` or `101010`, as they may end up being interpreted as binary values. Using `options(att_syntax)` will avoid any ambiguity, but that affects the syntax of the _entire_ `asm!` block. (See [Options](#Options), below, for more on `options`.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Link should be to #options
(lower case o).
@noncombatant Are you still working on this PR? I am currently preparing the |
I don't have time, unfortunately. |
Taken from rust-lang/rust#90086
I've incorporated the fixes from this PR in rust-lang/reference#1105 and rust-lang/rust-by-example#1483. Thanks @noncombatant |
Also, the Unsupported Register table should mention that LLVM reserves
rbx
(as noted in a previous PR I filed tonight.)