On 2013-04-09 09:39, Johannes Pfau wrote:
GCC compilers always generate target-specific asm first, then the
target specific assembler (as) is called to assemble that to an object
file. The difference is that gcc inline asm is identical to the native
assembly so it's just passed through to the as
Am Tue, 09 Apr 2013 08:14:44 +0200
schrieb Jacob Carlborg :
> On 2013-04-08 22:17, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> > On 8 April 2013 17:55, John Colvin
> > So, overall, it's not gonna happen unless dmd changes its
> > implementation of inline asm?
> >
> >
> >
> > Pretty much. Though given that wha
On 2013-04-08 22:17, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 8 April 2013 17:55, John Colvin
So, overall, it's not gonna happen unless dmd changes its
implementation of inline asm?
Pretty much. Though given that what you have changed is in rt folders,
I think the intent is that each compiler maintai
On 8 April 2013 17:55, John Colvin wrote:
> On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 15:29:13 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> On 8 April 2013 15:49, John Colvin
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 00:13:29 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> If only that logic held water...
GDC actually provi
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 15:29:13 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 8 April 2013 15:49, John Colvin
wrote:
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 00:13:29 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
If only that logic held water...
GDC actually provided the implementation of iasm to LDC.
Reasons why it
was yanked out.
- on
On 8 April 2013 15:49, John Colvin wrote:
> On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 00:13:29 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> If only that logic held water...
>>
>> GDC actually provided the implementation of iasm to LDC. Reasons why it
>> was yanked out.
>> - one big ugly x86 special case.
>>
>
> Fair enough, a
On Monday, 8 April 2013 at 00:13:29 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
If only that logic held water...
GDC actually provided the implementation of iasm to LDC.
Reasons why it
was yanked out.
- one big ugly x86 special case.
Fair enough, although I see no reason why Ds iasm shouldn't be
extended to s
On Apr 8, 2013 12:10 AM, "John Colvin"
wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 7 April 2013 at 23:02:28 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
>>
>> void main() {
>> version(D_InlineAsm_X86_64) {
>> pragma(msg,"x64");
>> }
>> else version(D_InlineAsm_X86) {
>> pragma(msg,"x8
On Sunday, 7 April 2013 at 23:02:28 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
void main() {
version(D_InlineAsm_X86_64) {
pragma(msg,"x64");
}
else version(D_InlineAsm_X86) {
pragma(msg,"x86");
}
else {
pragma(msg,"None");
void main() {
version(D_InlineAsm_X86_64) {
pragma(msg,"x64");
}
else version(D_InlineAsm_X86) {
pragma(msg,"x86");
}
else {
pragma(msg,"None");
}
}
dmd/ldc -m64: x64
gdc -m64/32 : None
10 matches
Mail list logo
