Re: Please revert and explain ":non_volatile"

2006-02-08 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Jonathan Worthington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Better names and/or solutions welcome. Chip has blessed this feature with a name - ":unique_reg" - and I've just checked in the same stuff as before, but with the accepted name in place of :non_volatile. Jonathan

Re: Please revert and explain ":non_volatile"

2006-01-30 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Chip Salzenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Please revert this change, Done, along with the docs and test changes relating to it. and refrain from checking in user-visible or design-significant changes to the core until I've OK'd them. Had mentioned this to leo, who said it sounded sane, and

Please revert and explain ":non_volatile"

2006-01-29 Thread Chip Salzenberg
On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 11:21:24PM -, 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 regi