* Segher Boessenkool <segher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > More precise *size* estimates, yes. And if the user lies he should not > > > be surprised to get assembler errors, etc. > > > > Yes. > > > > Another option would be if gcc parses the inline asm directly and > > does a more precise size estimation. Which is a lot more involved and > > complicated solution so I guess we wanna look at the simpler ones first. > > > > :-) > > Which is *impossible* to do. Inline assembler is free-form text. "Impossible" is false: only under GCC's model and semantics of inline asm that is, and only under the (false) assumption that the semantics of the asm statement (which is a GCC extension to begin with) cannot be changed like it has been changed multiple times in the past. "Difficult", "not worth our while", perhaps. Thanks, Ingo
