Hi,
Some idea: Maybe local stack use in the code compiled by GCC should be
optimized 'cause some local variables are conditional. If the condition
is not satisfied, then these variables don't need to be allocated from
the stack (e.g. sub $VAR_SIZE, %esp).
For example:
int *func(unsigned int con
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
You neglected to mention which version of gcc you were using, or which
target. The description and test case sound like GCC PR 9997:
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR9997
which was fixed for the 4.0 release.
Sorry, I'm using GCC 3.4.4, haven't tested on 4.0.X.
I saw the PR 9997,
Hi,
Is the comment symbol for arm "@"? But the intermediate code
(assembler code) generated by GCC 4.1.0 (gcc-4.1-20051022) can't be
assembled by the latest release of binutils (binutils-2.16.1).
Which is the correct line-comment symbol for arm assembler?
Thanks,
Hanzac
On 10/31/05, Hanzac Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is the comment symbol for arm "@"? But the intermediate code
> (assembler code) generated by GCC 4.1.0 (gcc-4.1-20051022) can't be
> assembled by the latest release of binutils (binutils-2.16.1).
>
> Which is the
