On 2012-06-20 12:51, Don Clugston wrote:
You seem to be conflating a couple of unrelated issues here.
One is the calling convention. The other is inline asm.
Comments in the thread about "asm is mostly used for short things which
get inlined" leave me completely baffled, as it is completely wrong.
There are two uses for asm, and they are very different:
(1) Functionality. This happens when there are gaps in the language, and
you get an abstraction inversion. You can address these with intrinsics.
(2) Speed. High-speed, all-asm functions. These _always_ include a loop.
You seem to be focusing on (1), but case (2) is completely different.
Case (2) cannot be replaced with intrinsics. For example, you can't
write asm code using MSVC intrinsics (because the compiler rewrites your
code).
Currently, D is the best way to write (2). It is much, much better than
an external assembler.
You do understand that the GCC-style inline assembly will still be
available?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
