On 27 March 2014 14:44, Behan Webster wrote:
> That is what led to this proposal.
I'm having a go at implementing named registers, and I also have
started a thread in the LLVM mailing list. Let's see how it goes...
> For the existing cases this is true. However such a builtin would allow it
> t
On 03/27/14 03:44, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:25 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
On 27 March 2014 10:12, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Can't you use __builtin_frame_address (0) instead?
That would give me the frame pointer, not the stack pointer, and the
user would have to calculate manu
On 27 March 2014 10:25, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 27 March 2014 10:12, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Can't you use __builtin_frame_address (0) instead?
>
> That would give me the frame pointer, not the stack pointer, and the
> user would have to calculate manually the offset to get the actual
> stack p
