From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-132086-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15879 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2004 19:04:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15849 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 19:04:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.205)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 19:04:17 -0000
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so356089wri
        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
        b=Owg8cDs/KA5FL7tb5ERTQHIDgfdhQXtbGQREczAPGgM7U+nfQKdGH9h0AC7lWHX4PVONbv9MK9IKJLHxFKcaRDRsBja4aBy6dvGom3nD7jIp6uyCLSiMT06CjCIuH7oIe3cz+Fkl4Xqdky6lGtto2ud8XUJ3tXs4cAyKgqSMZmE=
Received: by 10.38.96.46 with SMTP id t46mr1367615rnb;
        Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.38.171.80 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <84fc9c00041027120454f194a7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:11:00 -0000
From: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>, Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>, 
	"Joseph S. Myers" <jsm@polyomino.org.uk>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: New C parser [patch]
In-Reply-To: <20041027184957.GB18849@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0410222353190.30813@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.61.0410242017170.7018@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
	 <873c02e46k.fsf@codesourcery.com> <20041027184957.GB18849@redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg02400.txt.bz2

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:49:57 -0700, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 05:03:31PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > The only way
> > asm() at top level can continue to make sense is if we pass it along
> > to cgraph, and somehow get cgraph to preserve the global order of
> > functions and asm()s.  [Mind you, I would not have any problem with
> > dropping this feature.]
> 
> False.
> 
> ----
> static void doit(int, int);
> 
> __asm__("\
>         .ent doit       \n\
> doit:                   \n\
>         ...             \n\
>         ret             \n\
>         .end doit       \n\
> ");
> 
> void foo(int a)
> {
>   doit(a, a+1);
> }
> ----
> 
> For non-trivial definitions of doit, this can be extremely useful.
> Glibc, for instance, uses this in ld.so.

Why doesn't it use an assembly file then?  You seem to gain nothing
by using gcc inline assembly this way.

Richard.