Re: Inline assembly syntax

[Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>]

>>>>> "Stan" == Stan Shebs <shebs@apple.com> writes:

 Stan> Incidentally, as I was thinking about the assembly grokking
 Stan> problem, it occurred that we already have a rich mine of info
 Stan> about operand constraints - the machine descriptions
 Stan> themselves. Not always expressed as per-instruction, but for at
 Stan> least the one-instruction output strings, one could make up a
 Stan> table of instructions/constraint letters/types that would be
 Stan> pretty accurate, and not need special per-target hackery.

But that only covers the subset of instructions used by the compiler.
A big reason for assembly code is to do things the compiler doesn't
do.  So that's likely to exercise code patterns not found in the .md
file. 

      paul