On Monday, 20 July 2020 11:06:36 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development wrote: > Il 20/07/20 07:21, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: > > ASM is not a solution. There's at least one major compiler (MSVC) that > > doesn't allow any assembler. > > What do you mean, MSVC doesn't allow inline ASM?
Correct. To be clear: MSVC 64-bit doesn't allow inline assembler. The 32-bit versiondoes. > I'm not proposing that the ASM itself needs to be emitted by moc, moc > could just call a function implemented (in ASM) somewhere in > qobjectdefs.h or so... With MSVC, it needs to be defined in an .asm file. So it's going to be out-of- line every time. > > But see Ville's email. I think the pointer arithmetic is actually fine. > > Would be fine too with uchar*. > > I'm really not sure what part of that paper would make it fine? If you have a valid object, the paper does allow pointer arithmetic to access the object's representation. This is the direction the committee wants to go and it something compilers already do, so we can probably rely on the current behaviour remaining. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
