On 27 March 2014 15:06, <paul_kon...@dell.com> wrote: > But unwind code is inherently platform-dependent. Your objection to the > inline asm that references SP by name is that it's platform dependent. The > builtin would reduce the amount of platform dependent code by one line, i.e., > probably much less than one percent.
There were some user cases but to be honest, I'm not comfortable with regular users trying to access the stack pointer for anything. Everything else (low level, bare-metal) I can think of is platform-dependent elsewhere anyway, so that argument was invalid. cheers, --renato
