[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] fixes for gcc4

[D Richard Felker III]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 04:42:06AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > There is no advantage to retain a broken code even if it's more
> > > > readable.
> > >
> > > please elaborate about why it is broken in your oppinion
> >
> > a binary and over two vars has not a memory location then has not an
> > lvalue to put in asm code, I'm not the only that says this, if you
> > disagree complain to gcc developers... :)
> 
> "m" is NOT an output, its an input only constraint, "=m" would be an output, 
> so IMO theres no need for it to be a lvalue
> 
> if it where "=m" then your argument is certainly true and it would have to be 
> an lvalue ...

imo it does make sense to require an lvalue. "m" is the inline-asm
equivalent of the & (address of) operator in c, and thus it makes
sense to require not only an lvalue, but an lvalue for which taking
the address makes sense (e.g. not a variable declared as register).

rich