Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.bugs.4bsd,net.unix,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Bug in 4.[12] BSD C compiler with "asm" statement
Message-ID: <7746@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Jul-84 18:01:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.7746
Posted: Wed Jul  4 18:01:06 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jul-84 01:11:57 EDT
References: <314@harvard.ARPA>
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 24

This is what's called a ``known bug'' (or sometimes a ``feature'').
Everyone who uses asm() is supposed to know that extra null statements
are needed after if's.  asm()s sneak through the back door of the
compiler and don't count as a statement.  I suspect it's not worth
fixing.  By the way, if you write


	if (foo())
		asm("hi there");
		bar();
	else
		baz();

the call to ``bar'' is inside the ``if'', not outside.  The compiler
won't complain about the ``else'' either.

I say, leave the ``feature'' in there as a warning to anyone who
wants to use asm()!

Not entirely serious,
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci (301) 454-7690
UUCP:	{seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@maryland