Tim Matthews Wrote: > Bill Baxter wrote: > > > > So is it any slower now with things not in ASM? > > > > --bb > > > > You are not serious are you? The linker not the linked? > > If it's functionally more correct, easier to understand and easier to > implement link time optimizations then how can anyone justify asm to c > transition (where asm is not required) as a disadvantage?
it will be slower - I want my 100ms back.
