Hi - > > But folks here are pushing back by suggesting that that optimized > > calling convention may not be representable in the source > > language? which I think is accurate/fair...
> Could you clarify here? In the compiler, we can capture the changed > signature. BTW, currently we only target the C language as it is our > use case. Only targeting C doesn't matter. An optimized copy of a function that's emitted for only intra-CU use need not entertain the standard parameter location scheme (ABI). It may get parameters put into whatever random locations the compiler finds helpful for that very spot. It will emit a location list to help a debugger find them. However, those random location assignments need not match those from any other C code. Your "changed function signature" terminology is misleading. "signature" is relevant to an ABI-compliant function, not to an optimized private piece of code that's not reachable from an ABI interface. - FChE -- Dwarf-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
