title: Limitations of Intel Assembly Syntax Compared to AT&T
body: <p>To me, Intel syntax is much easier to read. If I go traipsing through assembly forest concentrating only on Intel syntax, will I miss anything? Is there any reason I would want to switch to AT&amp;T (outside of being able to read others' AT&amp;T assembly)? My first clue is that gdb uses AT&amp;T by default.</p>
  
  <p>If this matters, my focus is only on any relation assembly and syntax may have to Linux/BSD and the C language.</p>