What is the feature you'd like to have?
Ability to customize the suffix notation (.b, .w, .d, ...) displayed in BNIL listings to match a given architecture. Alternatively, a universal suffix notation that just uses the bit width, e.g. .8, .16, .32, etc.
Is your feature request related to a problem?
When working with many architectures other than x86, the notation used by Binary Ninja (w = 16-bit, d = 32-bit, q = 64-bit) presents a mismatch with the notation used by the architecture's assembly (e.g. h = 16-bit, w = 32-bit). It can be confusing when looking at both the disassembly and the IL on such architectures.
Are any alternative solutions acceptable?
An alternative is to modify the disassembly to match BNIL style, but that means the disassembled code is no longer valid as far as an architecture-native assembler is concerned, so I don't consider this a reasonable solution.
Additional Information:
Example screenshot showing LLIL on the left, disassembly on the right:

What is the feature you'd like to have?
Ability to customize the suffix notation (
.b,.w,.d, ...) displayed in BNIL listings to match a given architecture. Alternatively, a universal suffix notation that just uses the bit width, e.g..8,.16,.32, etc.Is your feature request related to a problem?
When working with many architectures other than x86, the notation used by Binary Ninja (w = 16-bit, d = 32-bit, q = 64-bit) presents a mismatch with the notation used by the architecture's assembly (e.g. h = 16-bit, w = 32-bit). It can be confusing when looking at both the disassembly and the IL on such architectures.
Are any alternative solutions acceptable?
An alternative is to modify the disassembly to match BNIL style, but that means the disassembled code is no longer valid as far as an architecture-native assembler is concerned, so I don't consider this a reasonable solution.
Additional Information:

Example screenshot showing LLIL on the left, disassembly on the right: