On 21/06/16 17:43, Jeff Law wrote: > I think there's enough resistance to deprecating basic asms within a > function that we should probably punt that idea. > > I do think we should look to stomp out our own uses of basic asms > within functions just from a long term maintenance standpoint. > > Finally I think we should continue to bring the implementation of > basic asms more in-line with expectations and future proofing them > since I'm having a hard time seeing a reasonable path to deprecating > their use.
Me too. I wonder if there's anything else we can do to make basic asm in a function a bit less of a time bomb. Andrew.
