Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
Project / Subsystem
binutils / rfc
Date
2026-05-03
Proposer
Nick Clifton
Source type
public_inbox
Consensus
Under Review
Sentiment
—/10
Technical tradeoffs
- • Adding annotations improves readability but increases code complexity.
- • Handling multiple comments requires careful design to avoid confusion.
- • The order of comments may need to be adjusted based on the assembly syntax (AT&T vs. Intel).
All attributes
- project
- binutils
- subsystem
- rfc
- patch_id
- —
- discussion_id
- 64c8b84c-ab9c-4bc2-9289-b4f165e85b72@suse.com
- source_type
- public_inbox
- title
- Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
- headline
- RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
- tldr
- Jan Beulich raises concerns about handling multiple comments in x86 disassembly with the proposed immediate annotation patch.
- proposer
- Nick Clifton
- consensus
- Under Review
- outcome
- under_review
- sentiment_score
- —
- technical_tradeoffs
-
- • Adding annotations improves readability but increases code complexity.
- • Handling multiple comments requires careful design to avoid confusion.
- • The order of comments may need to be adjusted based on the assembly syntax (AT&T vs. Intel).
- series_id
- —
- series_role
- standalone
- series_parts
- []
- tags
-
- • binutils
- • disassembler
- • x86
- • comments
- • immediate values
- bugzilla_url
- —
- date
- 2026-05-03T00:00:00.000Z
Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
Jan Beulich responds to an RFC for annotating immediates in x86 disassembly. He raises a question about how the patch will handle multiple comments, especially considering the existing %rip-relative operand printing already adds comments. He suggests ensuring that the order of comments matches the order of operands in both AT&T and Intel syntax.