This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: patch to add #pushdef, #popdef to cccp,cpplib


Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> Often they do not have a choice -- consider what's happened with asms
> that have drifted into system include files.  And in the process of
> getting wider exposure, they have uncovered fundamental flaws in the
> design of the asm extensions.

This is pure curiosity: is an example of these flaws the problem with
(eg) `asm ("foo %1,%0"::"r","r");' in C++ (parse error from the `::')?

Now, I'm not meaning to argue with you, but I thought the extended asm
statements were pretty good.  Mind you, getting the constraints and the
operand modifiers (eg %k0) right is a PITA, especially when they're
pooly documented.  So really, just what are the fundamental flaws in the
dedisng of the asm extensions?  Maybe they can be fixed (yeah, right. I
can imagine the caos).

Bill
-- 
Leave others their otherness


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]