>>83
What ad hominem? If I called you a faggot that would be ad hominem. If I suggest that you don't you lack understanding of the question that's a completely valid point to make, and not fallacious in and of itself. (And if I explained the meaning of irony, that would merely be condescending.) Besides, this isn't a debate--I just wanted information I thought you had, but I am quickly losing faith that you'd understand it if you did have it. It's perfectly okay not to know something!
On that point, you haven't shown any understanding of the systems involved. Who cares what compiler is used? That's a complete red herring. There's nothing magical about the compiler, it's the way the resulting code is run--what exactly it targets--that makes all the difference. Even if you wrote the assembly by hand it wouldn't prove anything. All I was saying is: since your reasoning stops at the compiler used you don't have any useful information for me at all.
I'm just trying to explain myself but if you take that as insulting or possibly as an attempt to compromise your character: don't worry, I'm happy to let your character speak for itself without comment one way or another.