May I ask which part do you think is annoying? The implementation or the usage?
For me it will be annoying if I have to enter the same defines at two places.
Ok, I got your point. As I previously mentioned, pure assembler projects are not uncommon in the embedded world. Considering that, how convenient it would be to enter the defines to be used with assembler into C/C++ defines? I think that wouldn't be good practice. I agree there may be times to enter same defines in both places but not all the time.
Btw do you think extra search paths for assembler under search directories can be implemented too?
It is possible, but is it needed? The question is same as the one for defines: would they be different than C/C++ ones most of the times?
I think you should consider library paths here. I can't think of a reason why C/C++ and Assembler libraries (or hand-crafted routines) should be kept in the exact same folder. In the current cb implementation, it's impractical and error prone to enter the library paths in the command line for non C/C++ files to assemble the assembler files. So what I do is to copy the library file to the source folder and then include it. If search paths for assembler were available that would be way too much practical and convenient.