Hi Walter, how about adding an attribute "interrupt"? Functions marked with this attribute should use a IRET instead of a RET/RETF. At least for the X86 versions, this would make D even more interesting to system development.

-- 
Robert M. Münch
Management & IT Freelancer
http://www.robertmuench.de

Robert M. Münch wrote:
> Hi Walter, how about adding an attribute "interrupt"? Functions marked  with this attribute should use a IRET instead of a RET/RETF. At least for  the X86 versions, this would make D even more interesting to system  development.

'extern(interrupt)' would seem to make sense for this.

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:50:19 -0700, Russ Lewis <spamhole-2001-07-16@deming-os.org> wrote:

> 'extern(interrupt)' would seem to make sense for this.

Why extern? But if this makes sense, why not. Robert

"Robert M. Münch" <robert.muench@robertmuench.de> wrote in message news:opr4buchrsheztw6@news.digitalmars.com...
> Hi Walter, how about adding an attribute "interrupt"? Functions marked with this attribute should use a IRET instead of a RET/RETF. At least for the X86 versions, this would make D even more interesting to system development.

How about instead using inline assembler?

void my_interrupt_handler()
{
    asm
    {    naked            ;
        pusha               ;
         call    function    ;
        popa              ;
        iret                ;
    }
}

void function()
{
    ... handle interrupt ...
}

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 14:19:45 -0800, Walter <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> How about instead using inline assembler?

Yes, that's the workaround. Of course possible and not to hard to do. My ides was based on the attribute concept being included in D because I like approaches, that are extendable and re-use the available concepts as much as possible.

I'm going to use this code for now ;-)) Robert