Hi Richard,
We wrote:
> Your patch changes behavior
> in multiple places of the compiler, which is not acceptable.
I don't change behavior of compiler since option "-mpush-args" is
passed to compiler by default. We do change compiler behavior if only
option "-mno-push-args" was passed to compile
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> It looks that i had to formulate my notes more precisely - the issue
> with which one our customer met is that there are plenty calls of C++
> functions with member class function arguments for which an order of
> call is essent
Hi Ian,
It looks that i had to formulate my notes more precisely - the issue
with which one our customer met is that there are plenty calls of C++
functions with member class function arguments for which an order of
call is essential (see e.g. attached testy-case on C that emulates it.
So I only c
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:10 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>
> This is simple fix that is aimed to help users in porting their
> applications to x86 platforms which rely on an order of function
> argument evaluation. To preserve direct order of argument evaluation
> they need to be added additional op
