inlining or not inlining...

[Walter Bright]

so wrote:
> If you are against this reasoning, i don't have any idea why D has 
> inline assembly, which again targets a very small audience.

The inline assembler is soooo much easier to deal with than the miserable, fugly 
assemblers found on the various systems.

The Linux as assembler is designed to crush all the joy out of writing in asm. 
The Microsoft assemblers change behavior constantly, breaking everything.

The inline assembler can't do everything a standalone assembler can, but what it 
does it does well enough, and is a pleasure (to me) to use.