ASM extensions

Gabe Gabe_member at pathlink.com
Wed Jul 12 23:01:01 PDT 2006


How difficult would it be to alter the inline assembler to accept paramter
arguments for new default syntaxes?  For instance, you could have something like
asm(intel) or asm(gas) or asm(arm) or asm(hal).  That way somebody could
progromatically decide the base style of the assembly syntax they were going to
use.  It doesn't seem to be internally inconsistent, as virtually all assembler
code should be written in 'version' tags anyway, as I see it.

Also, is there anything in the works for a somewhat simpler syntax for closures
(i.e. anything like passing Ruby code/Proc blocks)?
-Gabe





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list