From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18789 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2009 19:48:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 18744 invoked by uid 48); 22 Apr 2009 19:48:22 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090422194822.18743.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug inline-asm/39847] 16 symbolic register names generates error: more than 30 operands in 'asm' In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "d at teklibre dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg02030.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #19 from d at teklibre dot com 2009-04-22 19:48 ------- @Andrew: I agree with Jakub's point too, but don't believe merely doubling the number of operands will hurt much. Am trying it against 4.3.2... it's building as I write. When I figure out how to safely build 4.4 I will look at its code quality and fiddle in the same ways. I don't understand how using named register variables would help except for making this slightly easier to write in C + snippets of asm. symbolic assembly, and using the occasional complex memory-addressing instruction helps a lot. I will think on it. @H.J: I will provide an example when I get the spare brain cells. It will pay for me to test against 4.4 first, however. I very much appreciate all the attention paid to this today. I am going away to hack for a while while my cpu glows from building gcc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39847