Am 07.07.2011 20:58, schrieb eris: > I'm sure it's a good assembler, I'm just thinking that if you wanted to > cross-develop for ARM or some other CPU you would have to write the assembler > for > it rather than leverage an existing ARM assembler. > > Perhaps its easy enough to snag the critical assembler components from an > existing > assembler, but it still means that D sources must carry all of the existing > target > assemblers. > > Modularity...just saying. But I realize that this also allows for very tight > control over the compiled/assembled code. > > Maybe this is no big deal when you consider that cross-development requires a > custom build chain anyway. > > Other than that, I love D/D2. (Though trying to get LDC2/qtd to work right > now is > driving me a little nuts. :-) >
It's all much better than having to use different assembler syntax on different compilers (even when they're generating code for the same CPU).
