Lpc2000

Jaya,

I think your suggestion is misplaced: why would you think that 
anyone pointing out the pitfalls of a particular feature doesn't 
understand it?

Somone asked for an example of a feature, to which there were three 
basic responses:

- Provide an example, as asked. This has the merit of answering the 
direct question, but is of limited use otherwise

- Point out that the feature is compiler-specific, and it's best to 
look up the particular compiler's documentation. Personally, I think 
it is always more useful if someone looking for information is told 
where to find it themselves rather than being spoon-fed the answer. 
Hence, I'd suggest this is actually a more useful answer.

- Point out some of the pitfalls of the feature, the main one being 
that it is a very non-standard, non-portable feature. This to my 
mind is more useful again, as it puts forward people's experience 
from which people can benefit, and provides information that is not 
readily available elsewhere. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with the feature, just that there 
is usually (always?) a less error prone and simple way of achieving 
the same result.

As for an example of the pitfalls, I gave one in my last post, based 
on a suggested use of the feature from a previous poster (to 
implement 128-bit numbers).

You don't have to take anyone's advice or learn from their 
experience: there's noone forcing it on anyone. You certainly don't 
have to use it as yet another opportunity to disparage other's hard-
one experience, insult their capabilities and promote yourself yet 
again as the font of all knowledge.

Best wishes
Brendan

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "jayasooriah" <jayasooriah@...> 
wrote:
>
> Dear Robert, let me address an advocacy issue here ...
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@> 
wrote:
> > I do see uses for assembler, I am just of the opinion, informed
> > by my experiences, that inline assembler causes more problems
> > than it fixes.
> 
> My experience tells me otherwise.  Inline assembler has its place 
just
> like any other feature *provided* one understands how to use it 
before
> one does.
> 
> If you can give us some examples of where it has caused more 
problems
> than it fixed, I might be able to explain what I think went wrong.
> 
> The original question that started this thread was quite simple and
> specific.  A couple responded to the point with examples.
> 
> It is interesting those who go on and on against inline assembly 
have
> not come up with examples.  My guess is that these posters do not 
know
> enough enough about inline assembly to use it effectively or to 
come
> up with examples of their own.
> 
> Jaya
>