> i don't know whether, in the gcc port for plan 9, > david changed the register saving conventions to > match plan 9's. i carefully avoided the issue in the > snippet above, trashing only the return register %eax.
I remember distinctly that he was obliged to recompile the entire APE library to make sure it obeyed the GCC function call conventions, I thought it involved considerable differences. But, as I mentioned, I lost track of his description and I don't think I ever really understood the details :-( ++L
