This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Deprecating basic asm in a function - What now?
- From: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>, David Wohlferd <dw at limegreensocks dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:42:55 -0500
- Subject: Re: Deprecating basic asm in a function - What now?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <dc3ca16c-3521-757f-fcf0-50061f510f75 at LimeGreenSocks dot com> <CA+=Sn1=vKM2DYUrg40inMaKwejjC8YU3qs8iJPXn3+ok1trEQw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20160620135028 dot GA22744 at gate dot crashing dot org> <5767F5EE dot 60009 at redhat dot com>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 02:55:58PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 20/06/16 14:50, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > If basic asm is deprecated, that means some time later it will be
> > removed, at which time an asm without : can be used as extended asm
> Not exactly: it'd be an asm with no inputs, no outputs, and no
> clobbers i.e. no effects.
I'm not sure what you mean? It will be treated exactly the same as
basic asm (it is now, anyway). And it has an effect, it is volatile
after all, not having any outputs?