NASM 2.10 (Announce)
> (Meh.) I mean, AVX is barely out and supported, so why the rush to
> add AVX2?
More time to get bugs detected, and Intel partners might even have simulators available that emulate the new instruction sets.
E.g. the core of the (x86) 64-bit support of FPC was implemented with a simulator for testing.
Complete thread:
- NASM 2.10 - Rugxulo, 27.03.2012, 00:39
![Open in board view [Board]](img/board_d.gif)
![Open in mix view [Mix]](img/mix_d.gif)
- NASM 2.10 - Rugxulo, 27.03.2012, 00:42
- NASM 2.10 - marcov, 27.03.2012, 13:07
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 20.04.2012, 04:26
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 02.05.2012, 22:06
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 02.05.2012, 22:16
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 02.05.2012, 22:43
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 02.05.2012, 22:48
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 03.05.2012, 00:04
- NASM 2.10 uses "- Ox" by default - Rugxulo, 03.05.2012, 02:25
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - ecm, 03.05.2012, 02:37
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - Rugxulo, 03.05.2012, 08:18
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - ecm, 03.05.2012, 23:00
- NASM 2.10.01 - Rugxulo, 16.06.2012, 00:24
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - ecm, 03.05.2012, 23:00
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - Rugxulo, 03.05.2012, 08:18
- NASM 2.10 uses "-Ox" by default - ecm, 03.05.2012, 02:37
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 03.05.2012, 02:26
- NASM 2.10 uses "- Ox" by default - Rugxulo, 03.05.2012, 02:25
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 03.05.2012, 00:04
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 02.05.2012, 22:48
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 02.05.2012, 22:43
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - ecm, 02.05.2012, 22:16
- NASM 2.10 - revised preprocessor - RayeR, 02.05.2012, 22:06
- NASM 2.10 - Rugxulo, 27.03.2012, 00:42
Mix view