On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 12:17:12 -0700, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
wrote:

> santosh <santosh.k83@gmail.com> writes:
> [...]
> > Personally I'd prefer the Standardisation of the asm keyword and
> > associated semantics, as has been done with C++, than further messing
> > around with register.
>
> C++ defines the asm keyword and its syntax:
>
> asm ( string-literal ) ;
>
> but leaves its semantics entirely implementation-defined.
>
> I'm not convinced that this is useful. Any program that uses ``asm''
> is inherently non-portable, and must be modified if it's to be ported
> to another platform. I don't see how standardizing part of the syntax
> aids portability (or anything else).

It allows other tools to correctly parse (the C part of) the code
without needing to know the asm quirks for particular compiler(s).

- formerly david.thompson1 || achar(64) || worldnet.att.net