[lmz]

This sounds like a pretty weird thing to complain about (especially coming from the reversing direction).

Is the problem merely that they don't like how the strings are inlined in the code section? (Where else would you put it? Automagically putting them in the data section would also be non-obvious). Or is the problem that they think invoke should error out if the parameter is not an integral type that can be a directly pushed? Or is the problem with macro assemblers and high-level features in general?

The reason for such a macro is because it makes calling Windows functions more similar to how they are documented. I think it's still possible to use an assembler yet want such a macro for common uses (like calling Windows functions).

[Mathnerd314]

It sounds like the real problem is that the debugger (windbg) isn't smart enough to handle inline strings. If they had used a more powerful debugger they wouldn't have been confused enough to write a blog post about it.

[Something1234]

Do inline strings even truly exist in assembly?

[lmz]

They're just bytes in memory and there's nothing stopping you from putting whatever you want in the code section (as long as you don't try to execute it).

[tjoff]

I thought he was honest about it and specifically said it was more of a problem due to his perspective of it.