On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 7:41 AM Jim Brain via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> I'm assuming it's a language thing, but your comments seem overly > dismissive. You're essentially saying that the resulting generated ASM > is of no interest (the tool was the interesting part, you note) and > devoid of value. That didn't come across right. It was not my intention to make it sound like the ASM files have no value. I think it's great that they are doing this, and I'm sure somebody at MS spent a lot of (personal and probably unfunded) effort into making it happen. When I saw the announcement, I was hoping to see the machinery that made this code so portable, and I was disappointed that it's not the entire thing.