On 03/05/13 16:03, Richard Sandiford wrote:
David Brown writes:
Personally, I've used "naked" when I want to write pure assembly code
and don't want extra stack frames or "return" codes. I don't want to
write stand-alone assembly files (I've written mountains of them in the
past, and hope they
Microchip which makes the Pic32 embedded processor (Mips32) has the
naked attribute in their C compiler.
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/51686F.pdf
On 05/03/2013 03:29 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Glad to see the push-back on this :-)
reed kotler writes:
On 05/03/2013 01:06 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips porting?
You can implement it and submit the patch
My general opinion is that to not allow the naked attribute is to
pontificate over a group of sophisticated gcc users that are fully
capable of understanding what the naked attribute does. They can read
the manual and accept the responsibility for using the feature.
The ramifications of the fu
David Brown writes:
> Personally, I've used "naked" when I want to write pure assembly code
> and don't want extra stack frames or "return" codes. I don't want to
> write stand-alone assembly files (I've written mountains of them in the
> past, and hope they stay in the past). I am happier using
On 03/05/13 10:06, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> 2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
>>
>> Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips porting?
>> You can implement it and submit the patch to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
>> and I believe the mips maintainers are willing to have review with you. :)
>>
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Glad to see the push-back on this :-)
>
> reed kotler writes:
>> On 05/03/2013 01:06 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
>>> 2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips
porting?
You can
Glad to see the push-back on this :-)
reed kotler writes:
> On 05/03/2013 01:06 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
>> 2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
>>> Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips
>>> porting?
>>> You can implement it and submit the patch to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
>>> and
On 05/03/2013 01:06 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips porting?
You can implement it and submit the patch to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
and I believe the mips maintainers are willing to have review with you. :)
Oops~
2013/5/3 Chung-Ju Wu :
>
> Or do you think 'naked' is still useful for some other cases in mips porting?
> You can implement it and submit the patch to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
> and I believe the mips maintainers are willing to have review with you. :)
>
Oops~ I just noticed that the mips maintain
2013/5/3 reed kotler :
> This issue of naked function attribute support for Mips has come up in the
> context of LLVM and in regards to maintaining compatibility with gcc.
>
> It's my understanding that the idea of the naked function attribute was
> rejected for gcc Mips.
>
> I'm curious as to why.
On 05/02/2013 04:13 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:35 PM, reed kotler wrote:
This issue of naked function attribute support for Mips has come up in the
context of LLVM and in regards to maintaining compatibility with gcc.
It's my understanding that the idea of the naked func
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:35 PM, reed kotler wrote:
> This issue of naked function attribute support for Mips has come up in the
> context of LLVM and in regards to maintaining compatibility with gcc.
>
> It's my understanding that the idea of the naked function attribute was
> rejected for gcc Mip
13 matches
Mail list logo
