Re: depreciate asm with -traditional-cpp?

[der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

> appearently it doesn't need much to have .S files compiled without
> the -traditional-cpp flag, at least on i386.  It is just the
> concatenation operator where label names are synthesized which needs
> to be changed.  Are there good reasons to stick with traditional
> syntax?

I doubt it, per se.  But cpp is a *C* preprocessor, and here it is
being used as a non-C text preprocessor.  Trying to do this sort of
thing with a C preprocessor usually runs into issues with things (eg
misbalanced quotes) that are nonsensical in C but are fine in whatever
the language in question is.  Reiser preprocessor semantics are much
more forgiving towards this kind of thing than ANSI.

> (Background of my question is that I'm playing with clang which
> doesn't support "-traditional-cpp".)

Perhaps the i386 files in question are in fact C-compatible enough to
use a standard C preprocessor, but I think it would be a bad idea to
depend on that.  I'd prefer to either find/build a tradition-compatible
preprocessor for them or switch to a more generic preprocessor (eg m4).
I wrote a Reiser-compatible preprocessor ages ago, but I don't know
what's become of it; if anyone's interested I can try to scare it up.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B