On 22/06/16 09:59, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 06/20/2016 07:40 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 20/06/16 18:36, Michael Matz wrote: >>> I see zero gain by deprecating them and only churn. What would be the >>> advantage again? >> >> Correctness. It is very likely that many of these basic asms are not >> robust in the face of compiler changes because they don't declare >> their dependencies and therefore work only by accident. > > But the correctness problem is much more severe with extended asm. With > basic asm, the compiler can be conservative. With extended asm, there > is an expectation that it is not, and yet many of the constraints out > there are slightly wrong and can lead to breakage any time.
Yes, that's true. However, at least in the case of extended asm there is a chance that the programmer has thought about it. But anyway, the decision has been made. None of this matters. Andrew.
