Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!IUS1.CS.CMU.EDU!edw
From: edw@IUS1.CS.CMU.EDU (Eddie Wyatt)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Portable "asm" (Was: The D Programming Language)
Message-ID: <1092@PT.CS.CMU.EDU>
Date: 10 Mar 88 18:08:20 GMT
References: <4257@june.cs.washington.edu> <5080022@hpfcdc.HP.COM>
Sender: netnews@PT.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
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?

To which the obvious reply is speed - functions invocation can be 
RELATIVELY expensive.  The time taken to invoke a subroutine may
out way any gains that the asm statement made. Disclaimer - I don't use
asm - don't plan on it either.



-- 

Eddie Wyatt 				e-mail: edw@ius1.cs.cmu.edu