Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:24:39 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Open Watcom compiler Message-ID: <20030211232439.GC18238@ns1.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20030211214435.GI1877@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> References: <20030211003353.GA12187@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <15945.1278.292937.743702@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20030211192217.GD2881@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030211214435.GI1877@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 08:44:35AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > Note that Andrew said "convert" not "replace and avoid". I know. I'd like us to stop using inline assembly gratuitously. On the ia64 platform we have C functions of which the body is 99% assembly. This doesn't make sense really and tends to be less optimal (and less readable) than pure assembly. Another reason is that optimizers generally pessimize when inline assembly is present. On ia64 this is especially true due to the dependency constraints. There's no compiler (AFAICT) that truely knows about all the dependencies. Ok, sometimes inline assembly is the only good solution. In that case it's acceptable to pay for the burden of having multiple implementations and/or other complexities. But I don't think that a 1:1 conversion is beneficial. > I don't know what the OW support for inline assember is. I think it's mostly incompatible. I haven't used it much, because I tend to create an assembly file, but it's definitely something I'll dig into. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030211232439.GC18238>