Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!think!ames!eos!aurora!labrea!decwrl!hplabs!hpcea!hpfcdc!boemker
From: boemker@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Tim Boemker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Portable "asm" (Was: The D Programming Language)
Message-ID: <5080022@hpfcdc.HP.COM>
Date: 7 Mar 88 22:42:20 GMT
References: <4257@june.cs.washington.edu>
Organization: HP Ft. Collins, Co.
Lines: 14

Since the interface between C and in-line asm seems to be so
problematic (not to mention non-portable), why not write
those routines that should be written in assembly in assembly?

(Please don't tell me about needing just a rotate here or there
for performance; reconsider the original partitioning of the task
and find an alternative that separates the high-level part and
the low-level part.)

(Yes, I have written separately compiled assembly routines, and
I have repartitioned tasks to find an aesthetically appealing,
efficient alternative.)

Tim Boemker