https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
--- Comment #6 from LIU Hao ---
gcc/config/i386/i386.cc:
```
void
ix86_print_operand (FILE *file, rtx x, int code)
{
if (code)
{
switch (code)
{
case 'A':
switch (ASSEMBLER_DIALECT)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
--- Comment #5 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to jbeulich from comment #4)
> Being as compatible as possible with MASM has been the primary goal of
> supporting Intel syntax. Intel's SDM doesn't specify complete assembly
> language; it serves as a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
--- Comment #4 from jbeulich at suse dot com ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #3)
> (In reply to jbeulich from comment #2)
> > Sure, but there's no reason for gas to not accept what MASM would. You also
> > don't really make clear why you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
--- Comment #3 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to jbeulich from comment #2)
> Sure, but there's no reason for gas to not accept what MASM would. You also
> don't really make clear why you think this is an issue, and hence why it
> should be changed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
--- Comment #2 from jbeulich at suse dot com ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #0)
> ptc_to_foo:
> jmp [QWORD PTR foo[rip]]
> ```
>
> The outer pair of brackets are superfluous.
Sure, but there's no reason for gas to not accept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109257
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
