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