Andl | Andl is A New Database Language | Database library

Your code is correct, there's just a typo for chart.animation (it's been written as annimation):

It is just a fancy way of computing the offset into the array a[n-1].

1073741823 is 0x3fffffff. If n is 3, for example, it will add them and get 0x40000002. Then it multiplies by 4 with the second instruction, which results in 0x00000008, discarding the top bits.

So we are left with an offset of 8 bytes, which is exactly the offset (in bytes) that you need for a[n-1], i.e. a[2] (when the size of an int is 4 bytes).

No such a function does not exist.

And unless you are writing the compiler (you're not) you should not really care about the actual machine code being generated. The compiler is free to optimize that code anyway it sees fit (as long as it is correct) depending on the options you pass in. And with -O3 you should get the fastest code, even with jumps.

If there were a function like you suggested, you're code would be tied to a single version of a single compiler with a particular set of optimization options. In other words: bye bye portability.

You cannot see it because it is not what happens. You have expression

Thanks to Nate Eldredge for helping me get the answer.

To link the file produced by as, use gcc -v (file).

This is platform-specific, but typically, space is reserved when the program starts, and you have a maximum stack size. On Windows, the default maximum is 1MB according to Microsoft, and you can change it with a linker setting (in project properties in Visual Studio).

If your program is multi-threaded, other threads' stack space is reserved when they start.

If you try to use more stack space than there is, then typically, your program crashes, and it may or may not also be a security vulnerability (i.e. let people hack into your program) - see "Stack Clash".

These are local labels, a gas-specific feature.

Here 1f refers to the next instance of the 1 label (forward) and 1b refers to the previous instance (backward).

So code like

Send only value of productCost.

The answer lies in Section 3.4.1.1 of the Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software Developer’s Manual Volume 1 (Basic Architecture) which states:

When in 64-bit mode, operand size determines the number of valid bits in the destination general-purpose register:

• 64-bit operands generate a 64-bit result in the destination general-purpose register.
• 32-bit operands generate a 32-bit result, zero-extended to a 64-bit result in the destination general-purpose register.
• 8-bit and 16-bit operands generate an 8-bit or 16-bit result. The upper 56 bits or 48 bits (respectively) of the destination general-purpose register are not modified by the operation. If the result of an 8-bit or 16-bit operation is intended for 64-bit address calculation, explicitly sign-extend the register to the full 64-bits.

See the second bullet.

You can gain some insight as to why this is so by reading: Why do x86-64 instructions on 32-bit registers zero the upper part of the full 64-bit register?