On 8/22/12 4:58 PM, Babic, Nedeljko wrote:
Your list is more or less correct in general terms.
We agree that inline assembler is a problem for clang (and other compilers that
do not support it).
However, for our architecture and code that we are delivering for this project
rest of the points from the list are simply not valid (mips doesn't have auto
increment, there are no function calls in inline assembly, etc.).
Anyhow, currently we did not plane resources for this project to support
two versions of the same code (inline assembly and external asm).
Until we obtain those resources sending patches will be on hold.
Your code is here, hopefully the inline bits that can stay inline can be
merged now even if you do not have time to convert the rest of it to
normal asm.
lu
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
libav-devel@libav.org
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
