Skip to content
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

Not an issue, just questions about blink16 #5

Open
Vutshi opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Not an issue, just questions about blink16 #5

Vutshi opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Vutshi
Copy link
Contributor

Vutshi commented May 30, 2024

Created to discuss things I don't understand about blink16.

  1. I found that the following code is shown as bipartite in blink16:
1000:0126 26                es                
1000:0127 8b 07             mov     (%bx),%ax 

whereas MartyPC and Ghidra show it as one instruction:
Screenshot 2024-05-30 at 22 31 44

Is this intended behavior?

  1. Is there a way to switch the memory views to the actual byte values?

Best

@ghaerr
Copy link
Owner

ghaerr commented May 30, 2024

I found that the following code is shown as bipartite in blink16:
Is this intended behavior?

Yes - I grabbed the disassembler I had written for 86sim and it displays instruction prefixes on a separate line. Its on my list of things to enhance, but initially proved to be a bit more complicated than I had hoped. Both the 8086 emulator and disassembler are extremely small, only a single .c file each.

BTW, has the AT&T vs Intel 8086 instruction display difference driven you crazy yet? I suppose it would also be nice to have an Intel instruction display option.

Is there a way to switch the memory views to the actual byte values?

That is also on my list, and would be a nice enhancement.

Let me see what I can do...

@Vutshi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Vutshi commented May 30, 2024

BTW, has the AT&T vs Intel 8086 instruction display difference driven you crazy yet?

Yes, it gets on my nerves. I find Intel representation much cleaner because %%% hurt my eyes. On the other hand, the backward thinking in Intel seems strange to me.

I suppose it would also be nice to have an Intel instruction display option.

That would be cool.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants