If we can select the ABi for our program (using gcc), why is there a
need for ABI stability?!
why not put it on a define
#define abi v3
int main() {
}
Each user would just have to compile the code, to follow the abi...no
need to worry changing it
thanks
andre
Because implementing an ABI, or dealing with an incompatibnle change, is hard
work. Also, ABI stability means that old binaries work. So ABI stability
isn't so much a requirement for the compiler as it is a requirement for any
sane operating system. An OS that changes ABI without an extremely
Snapshot gcc-14-20230709 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20230709/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 14 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Can we debate in this mailing list? thanks
On 7/9/23 22:04, Paul Koning wrote:
Because implementing an ABI, or dealing with an incompatibnle change, is hard
work.
you could just use one ABI..(that's what you have)..you can use other
, only at a cost of specifying an ABI version
the abi
Hi
The assembler checks at each instruction if the instruction is within the
selected subset of risc-v extensions or not. I do not quite understand why this
check is done here.
I suppose that gcc, before emitting any instruction does this check too,
somewhere. Because if an instruction is emitt
On Sun, Jul 9, 2023 at 11:24 PM jacob navia wrote:
>
> Hi
> The assembler checks at each instruction if the instruction is within the
> selected subset of risc-v extensions or not. I do not quite understand why
> this check is done here.
>
> I suppose that gcc, before emitting any instruction do
