Yes, there is only function argument which is the result of the comma
operator.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:46 PM AJ D wrote:
> Nope, -std=c++17 didn’t help either.
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:33 PM David Brown
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 04/02/2021 22:21, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> > On Feb 04 2021, Da
Nope, -std=c++17 didn’t help either.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:33 PM David Brown wrote:
>
>
> On 04/02/2021 22:21, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > On Feb 04 2021, David Brown wrote:
> >
> >> For the built-in comma operator, you get guaranteed order of evaluation
> >> (or more precisely, guaranteed orde
Isn't comma operator suppose to honor left-to-right associativity?
When I try it on this test case, it exhibits right-to-left associativity.
#include
struct CBI;
struct EC;
struct CET;
struct CBI {
CBI& operator,(const CBI& rhs)
{ return *const_cast(&rhs); }
};
struct E
Hi,
I have a function for which GCC is generating the following code (just
showing the relevant snippet here).
5a70 :
5a70: 4c 8d 54 24 08 lea0x8(%rsp),%r10
5a75: 48 83 e4 f0 and$0xfff0,%rsp
5a79: 41 ff 72 f8
Hi,
I was looking at the implementation of mstackalign in gcc (O2/O3) and it
looks like we generate code for mstackalign (i.e. generate instructions for
stack alignment) before pushing $rbp to stack/setting $rbp. In the
epilogue, we do the same in reverse order.
some_routine:
0x00
