View Single Post
Old 27 January 2020, 09:54   #2
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,881
I don't think warning for "pauses" is truly viable.

Meaning, I suppose you could create something that detects loops and if you then emulate the full logic involved* you may even detect that loops take a long time. But you'd have no way of knowing if this is by design or not. Pretty much all code contains loops that run a long time on purpose. You'd get warnings for perfectly logical stuff all the time in such a scenario.

Optimization is already possible to a certain extent in VASM, but the level you're asking for here will probably be hard or impossible to do - it's not as easy as you might think to rearrange code significantly without changing it's meaning. Which might make debugging a nightmare.

Plus, on a more serious level - I believe that programmers learn and grow by making lots of mistakes. So an assembler that tries to hide or optimize your mistakes away seems like a bad idea in that regard. You learn more by having your program slow down to a crawl and then figuring out what's going on than you do by never seeing the slow down because of a smart assembler

*) Which IMHO is way, way, way out of scope for what an assembler should be doing
roondar is online now  
Page generated in 0.04267 seconds with 11 queries