From: you AT somehost DOT somedomain (Herman Schoenfeld)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Inline assembly in djgpp
Date: 15 May 1998 23:54:12 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <6jikj4$ohh$1@grissom.powerup.com.au>
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 980514112155 DOT 287L-100000 AT is> <6jeij9$2dm$1 AT grissom DOT powerup DOT com DOT au> <355C064A DOT 3BCB AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts3509.powerup.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

 >If you would read the docs first before making statements like ``an
 >obsolete implementation of a semi-functional assembler'' then you would
 >discover that there is much more to it than it may at first seem. It is
 >a very advanced (and easy once you know it) interface between a HLL and
 >machine code which allows for compiler optimizations within the 
 assembly
 >source. And yes you can use external (global) symbols but please read
 >the documentation since it's usage is far too extended to explain that
 >here.
 >And there is abcolutely nothing that prevents you from writting an
 >assembler routine in pure asm if you don't want to give in to the
 >feeling not to use the inline asm. However, I assure you, when you know
 >it, you will be pleased that you know it.
 
Tell me the link to read. They say nothing. Have you even used the inline 
assembler before? Judging by your flawed thinking patterns, I think 
have you fail to do as such. The inline implementation is nothing short 
of attrocious. 
a) You can't understand it
b) you can't write fluently in it
c) it's extremely non-portable
d) it would be easier to add intel asm support

How could any of that be "advanced" about that - oh - it can optimise 
inline assembly. That's just great. If i wanted the compiler to do that 
then i'd just write in plain C code.