Exactly, and I think the same should apply to a "BALR 14,15".
mario
On 11/22/21 6:46 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Compiler has no way of knowing whether cFunction() has side effects. For example, it
might do a printf() that you would "miss" if the call were optimized out.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Mario Bezzi
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 9:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Curious compiler optimization
Apparently not..
int cGlue(void *functParms) {
int cFuction(void *);
int functRC = cFunction(functParms);
return 0;
}
SOURCE,XREF,SSCOMM,LIST,LANGLVL(EXTENDED),LONGNAME,ASM,RENT,OPT(3)
000D8 End of Prolog
000002 | *
000003 | * int cFuction(void *);
000004 | *
000005 | * int functRC =
cFunction(functParms);
000D8 5800 1000 000005 | L r0,functParms(,r1,0)
000DC 58F0 3000 000005 | L
r15,=V(cFunction)(,r3,0)
000E0 4110 D098 000005 | LA
r1,#MX_TEMP1(,r13,152)
000E4 5000 D098 000005 | ST
r0,#MX_TEMP1(,r13,152)
000E8 0DEF 000005 | BASR r14,r15
000006 | *
000007 | * return 0;
000EA 41F0 0000 000007 | LA r15,0
000008 | * }
000EE 000008 | @1L1 DS 0H
000EE Start of Epilog
On 11/22/21 6:21 PM, Peter Relson wrote:
Maybe you'd get
the same effect with this program if the __asm was instead a "call" to an
external routine.
