At 7:00 AM +0100 4/27/02, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Andrew J Bromage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> G'day all.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 08:16:27AM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
>>
>>> I also vote for reserving some caller-save registers to make
>>> arg passing faster, however, reserving 16 is probably useless, except
>>> for symmetry.
>>>
>>> I think most texts agree that 5 or so are about all you need.
>>
>> Fair enough. In that case, in the interests of using round numbers,
>> I vote for X0-X7 to be for argument passing and, in the event that
>> they're not actually used for argument passing, caller-save.
>
>I'm trying to see how, if you want genuine continuations and/or tail
>call optimization, you're going to get away with anything but 'caller
>saves everything important to it', and what do you know, I
>can't. A decent compiler will obviously optimize away some of the
>saving of 'extras' for relatively simple subroutine calls, but at the
>limit you're going to need to presave everything surely.
We're going caller-save. I think I made this declaration before, but
now it's backed up with pure PDD goodness. :)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
