On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 12:58:07 +0200
Philipp Klaus Krause <p...@spth.de> wrote:
> SDCC currently supports two forms of inline assembler:
>
> 1:
> __asm
> asm code here
> __endasm;
>
> and
>
> 2:
> __asm("asm code here");
>
> Form 1 requires some ugly hacks to avoid conflicts in the preprocessor.
> I wonder if we could drop those, and maybe even change the keyword in
> form 2 to __asm__.
>
> Does anyone rely on form 1 and would not want support for it dropped?
> Any opinions on the possible rename of form 2?
Fuzix relies on form 1 but at the moment I'm stuck with the older SDCC
anyway due to all the register and other changes.
_______________________________________________
Sdcc-user mailing list
Sdcc-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user
