| ??? 12/12/06 14:02 Read: times |
#129341 - sometimes inline assembler is because Responding to: ???'s previous message |
consider why you want to use inline assembler.
Why can you not simply write those parts that need it in assembler, and call them from 'C'? Sometimes inline assembler is because assembler is required and some idiot has declared that all code must be C (seen it). If that is not the case, I who;ehardedly support Andys suggestion. I do not know if I can count the number of circumventions of silly rules I have seen. A true classic: A major cellphone company (name witheld) has the rule of "No global variables under any circumstances". So, in main() there is an enomous structure, the pointer to which is carried all over the place. DUH Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Help me for inline assembly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| wait a min! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Explain! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Help me for inline assembly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How 'C' systems start. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how to link the assembled file | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You still haven't said | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RTFM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil C51 and the SRC directive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Before you go there... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sometimes inline assembler is because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Heh. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| absolutly! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| To Access Stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not necessarily | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That's my line! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Still ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I think ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The only useful information on the stack ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not want, but have to | 01/01/70 00:00 |