Quote:
>Allow me to be the first (probably of many) who advise against this.
>gas has a number of serious problems. gcc and such don't produce the
>sorts of code that'll make the problems apparent, but hand-written
>code can and more or less inevitably will, usually fairly quickly.
Let me be the first, and probably the only one, to disagree. GCC+inline
assembly is a very powerful tool. By using GAS, you'll avoid the mostly
useless 16-bit code that still hangs on in some corners. And, of course,
the endless DOSisms. GCC+inline allows you to intersperse assembly with a C
framework and optimize the parts where it makes a difference. And if you're
running under a UNIX system, using GCC+inline asm will avoid the multiple
bugs the NASM still has. And, of course, the annoyance of the 2 pass
maximum on macro expansion. And, don't forget, the extended assembly syntax
(meaning the syntax of the C-asm interface, not the assembly code itself)
is applicable to every other processor GCC has been ported to.
My earlier message giving the URL of Brennans Guide to Inline Assembly
never made it through. Sleeping moderator? The URL is
http://sag-www.ssl.berkeley.edu/~korpela/djgpp_asm.html
Eric
--
Eric Korpela | An object at rest can never be
<a href="http://sag-www.ssl.berkeley.edu/~korpela">Click for home page.</a>