Including Assembly into C++

[FlatAssembler]

So, guys, what do you think is the easiest way to include Assembly into C++? I've made a video explaining what I think is the easiest way. Do you think there is an easier way?

[ThinkingIsThinking]

Is this about programming?

[FlatAssembler]

Is this about programming?

Well, yes.

[Alex K]

So, guys, what do you think is the easiest way to include Assembly into C++? I've made a video explaining what I think is the easiest way. Do you think there is an easier way?

Wasn't there a really simple command for inline assembly inside the .cpp which would even allow using the variables from the c++ namespace directly in the assembly code?

---

Is this about programming?

If it weren't, it would have to be something really weird.

[LastPoet]

Wasn't there a really simple command for inline assembly inside the .cpp which would even allow using the variables from the c++ namespace directly in the assembly code?

There is. It's the "asm" command. It is heavily platform dependent, given the fast progress of CPU's. Usefull at some specific applications. In my old job, there was an old table cutting machine, that cutted plastic with a shape you could export from coreldraw, but the software was not supported. So I used a few pieces of code to bootstrap that with asm. I could only use it in an old processor, but it worked like a charm.

[FlatAssembler]

Wasn't there a really simple command for inline assembly inside the .cpp which would even allow using the variables from the c++ namespace directly in the assembly code?

There is. It's the "asm" command. It is heavily platform dependent, given the fast progress of CPU's. Usefull at some specific applications. In my old job, there was an old table cutting machine, that cutted plastic with a shape you could export from coreldraw, but the software was not supported. So I used a few pieces of code to bootstrap that with asm. I could only use it in an old processor, but it worked like a charm.

I think using those inline assembly extensions just makes things more compicated, since then, at least in GCC, you can't read from and write into the same variable.

[LastPoet]

I think using those inline assembly extensions just makes things more compicated, since then, at least in GCC, you can't read from and write into the same variable.

Take the advice of an old pig-slaying man, Know the automated ways, You, on the other hand, i'd wager, never worked a full week. really, a simple expression compiler is BASIC. (computer joke Visual BASIC is even worse). In the end t's all about producing code for the needs.

[Alex K]

Don't diss Visual Basic I have fond memories, got it for Christmas '93 and spent all holidays long RADin funny Programmes for Windows 3.11 under the Christmas tree.

[FlatAssembler]

I think using those inline assembly extensions just makes things more compicated, since then, at least in GCC, you can't read from and write into the same variable.

Take the advice of an old pig-slaying man, Know the automated ways, You, on the other hand, i'd wager, never worked a full week. really, a simple expression compiler is BASIC. (computer joke Visual BASIC is even worse). In the end t's all about producing code for the needs.

I am not sure what you mean. In case there is any confusion, I meant including existing Assembly code into C++ (as is quite obvious from the video), not writing new Assembly code inside existing C++ code. GCC inline assembly extensions are, I guess, very useful in that case, but not when you want to include the Assembly code my program produces into C++.

[LastPoet]

Don't diss Visual Basic I have fond memories, got it for Christmas '93 and spent all holidays long RADin funny Programmes for Windows 3.11 under the Christmas tree.

You nerd! All my dad got me was a commodore whooping 64 k