On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 11:21:24PM -0000, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > Earlier today I checked in a change that lets you add a :non_volatile flag > to a local or parameter. > > .param int i :non_volatile > .local int j :non_volatile > > This says to the register allocator "don't re-use the register that this > parameter or local goes in to",
Please revert this change, and refrain from checking in user-visible or design-significant changes to the core until I've OK'd them. If this feature is necessary (which it may be), the name "non_volatile" is misleading to the point of being dead wrong ("volatility" in the C sense is not exactly a helpful meme in Parrot land). And it's ugly: negative options are usually not unbad. And this one definitely is. (Or is it 'not'? ... I hate negative options.) -- Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>