Any interest in discussing at&t x64 assembly?
>>57453488
>x64 assembly
It's disgusting
What does the assembly in the OP mean?
>>57453493
anything is disgusting in AT&T syntax
>>57453488
Intel's looks cleaner
What advantage does AT&T one have?
>>57453526
Setup a stack frame
Move some shit in the accumulator
Return
>>57453537
But it makes me feel so leet
>>57453552
but what value does it return?
>>57453569
Well since that's all I've got to go on, I'm guessing that value in eax. No, I don't know why.
>>57453569
The number it put in eax.
>>57453579
because that's the convention in x86. always has been, actually, since not just the 8086 but the earlier designs it was derived from.