[Bug c/12118] New: Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[Bug c/12118] New: Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[mkgnu at gmx dot net]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118

           Summary: Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P2
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: mkgnu at gmx dot net
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org

This is a feature request to add a function attribute that allows implementing a
function in C and producing straight machine code for it without any assumptions
that the implementation constitutes a function. i.e There should be no "ret" or
"leave" assembly instruction at the end of such a function. the "noreturn"
attribute currently does not provide this

The need for this is best described in the thread:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2003-08/msg02681.html

One should be able to write a routine in C without gcc assuming that the routine
is a function call. Such an attribute should be an improvement on the "noreturn"
attribute.

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118


pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P2                          |P3


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2003-09-01 04:49 -------
I want to say if you want no return instruction use an asm file because C is not asm.

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[mkgnu at gmx dot net]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118



------- Additional Comments From mkgnu at gmx dot net  2003-09-03 02:16 -------
There was additional discussion on this on

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2003-09/msg00146.html

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118


pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2003-09-18 07:27 -------
Again C is not ASM, use an asm file when you want to low level stuff.

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[mkgnu at gmx dot net]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118


mkgnu at gmx dot net changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|INVALID                     |


------- Additional Comments From mkgnu at gmx dot net  2003-09-18 16:00 -------
Reopening bug.

I kindly request you give this feature some more thought and open it to
discussion with other GCC developers, CCing me on the discussion.

Again, you should NOT  have to write asm for something that could be plainly
written in C. One should have the option of telling gcc how to do generate code
with respect to the registers that will be used, just like regparms is used to
tell gcc to expect its arguments in registers, and stdcall to expect arguments
on stack. I don't see how telling gcc to preserve the state of registers is any
different. 

I see value in a feature as this. I'd rather you assign this bug the lowest
priority rather than close it. But please discuss this with other developers.

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[mkgnu at gmx dot net]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118



------- Additional Comments From mkgnu at gmx dot net  2003-10-03 19:40 -------
There was additional discussion on this on:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2003-10/msg00025.html

[Bug c/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[dhazeghi at yahoo dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com  2004-01-18 00:35 -------
I see no reason this cannot be done (easily, maybe not).

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2004-01-18 00:35:19
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118

[Bug target/12118] Add function attribute that treats C code as plain asm

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-06-09 00:54 -------
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-06/msg00415.html

Not going to be done.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12118