Undelivered mail

[MAILER%ALASKA.BITNET at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]

Subject:  Re: Portable "asm" (Was: The D Programming Language)

[Non-Deliverable:  User does not exist or has never logged on]

Reply-To: Info-C at BRL.ARPA

Received: From UWAVM(MAILER) by ALASKA with Jnet id 6737
          for SXJVK at ALASKA; Fri, 11 Mar 88 21:08 AST
Received: by UWAVM (Mailer X1.25) id 4533; Fri, 11 Mar 88 22:07:32 PST
Date:         Thu, 10 Mar 88 18:08:20 GMT
Reply-To:     Info-C at BRL.ARPA
Sender:       Info-C List <INFO-C at NDSUVM1>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was netnews at PT.CS.CMU.EDU
From:         Eddie Wyatt <edw at IUS1.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Portable "asm" (Was: The D Programming Language)
Comments: To: info-c at brl-smoke.arpa
To:           Vic Kapella <SXJVK at ALASKA>

> Since the interface between C and in-line asm seems to be so
> problematic (not to mention non-portable), why not write
> those routines that should be written in assembly in assembly?

To which the obvious reply is speed - functions invocation can be
RELATIVELY expensive.  The time taken to invoke a subroutine may
out way any gains that the asm statement made. Disclaimer - I don't use
asm - don't plan on it either.



--

Eddie Wyatt                 e-mail: edw at ius1.cs.cmu.edu