At 10:33 AM 9/14/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
>On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 10:20, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Okay, we've had a number of people in favor of a good macro assembler for
> > Parrot. Given that, do we have anyone who'll volunteer to define,
> maintain,
> > and extend the thing? (Presuming we jump off of the current assembler,
> > which seems reasonable)
> >
> > There probably isn't a huge amount to do with the thing--maintain macro
> > substitutions, handle local labels, manage sub definitions, and suchlike
> > things.
> >
>
>Wouldn't it largely be just filtering the input through cpp?
CPP? Yech! We have a perfectly good string handling language handy. :)
Seriously, there's more to it than that. (Ignoring the whole "Do we have
cpp" question) The macro format will probably not resemble C's (no parens
to start, I'd expect) either in definition or use. The C style macro
doesn't mesh too well with the normal assembler coding style. Besides,
we'll be doing enough other stuff in the assember (local labels, sub
definitions, and advanced constant definitions) that it's not much more work.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
