priority of operators in Assembly

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

hello My Friends
I've tried a lot and I'm the program prioritize your operator to write in Assembly. Please anyone can you help friends and is an example for a program that introduced me to prioritize the operator specifies, for example, a computational expression as input and outputs based on get prioritized based on returns.

input :
(2+3)/2*3;

Posted 4-Jun-13 3:00am

arh66

Add a Solution

Comments

CPallini 4-Jun-13 9:08am

What are you trying to do? Are your trying to translate expressions into assembly instructions?

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 5-Jun-13 19:03pm

Hard to say. Did you see my answer? However, my guess could be incorrect. You make a good point: it's OP's responsibility to ask a question more accurately.
—SA

2 solutions

Solution 2

see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/126fe14k.aspx[^].

Posted 4-Jun-13 3:56am

Richard MacCutchan

Comments

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 5-Jun-13 19:01pm

Why C++, if the question was about assembly language?
However, in practice, C++ rules will be still applicable in most cases, but at least you should have explained the idea...
—SA

Richard MacCutchan 6-Jun-13 3:03am

See the question.

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 6-Jun-13 7:47am

If you saw the discussion in comments to the question: it's not quite clear to me...
—SA

Richard MacCutchan 6-Jun-13 7:52am

Nor is it to me. But it 'appears' that OP wants to know what rules of operator precedence to adopt, in order to get the correct results for a mathematical expression. Hence, the link I provided may be what he/she needs to look at. You may find that your interpretation of questions like this is not always the correct one.

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 6-Jun-13 9:46am

That's the whole point. I'm really not sure, in this and some other cases. You are right, of course.
In this case, I'm just curious why C++, not anything else? It's assembly language, something not standardized. I think I made a correct point: it depends on particular compiler (Assembler), but most likely matches the most typical rule sets, in practice.
—SA

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Accepted Answer · 2013-06-04T03:55:00

Assembly language itself does not have operators. And it is not like other languages, as it is not one single language applicable to all processors. The program is composed of processor instructions. No priority is needed, because instructions have exact meaning described, in particular, in processor documentation, and the order of execution (in a single thread/fiber, of course) is defined by order of those instructions. There is no and cannot be any ambiguity.

As to the expression example you've shown in your question, this is not actually a part of the code. You can use some compile-time expression (it totally depends on the version of the Assembly compiler and not related to the processor). The compiler computes such statically known values and use it in the production of compilation as they were the immediate constants at the point where you use them. I don't think the priority of operator can be too complex or much different from any high-level computer language.

—SA