public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/38496] Gcc misaligns arrays when stack is forced follow the x8632 ABI Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:54:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20081215145251.10330.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-38496-12761@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> ------- Comment #13 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-15 14:52 ------- >No; "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from" is a well-known saying. And also one without application here. I am aware of no other standard for Linux ABI other than the one in the linux standard base. Gcc did not choose another standard, it violated the one and only existing standard. I am not arguing that standards should never be changed, but rather that you shouldn't violate an existing one without reason. The reason gcc had to make this change is mere convenience (it keeps you from doing a bit-level operation and a register save in the preamble), which is not near strong enough a reason to take something that used to support the standard (gcc before this decision) and make it support absolutely no standard (your position now). Please try to avoid the mischaracterizations you are making: you have not switched from standard A to standard B, you have switched from standard A to no standard. >Then you should have made it clear much earlier in this discussion that >Windows is your concern. Because there is no one ABI for "i?86-*-*", and >an ABI written for ELF-based Unix systems 1990-1996 is far, far less >relevant to PECOFF-based Windows in 2008 than the limited relevance to >Linux in 2008. Actually, both windows and the linux base ABI handle arguments the exact same way. So, until gcc arbitrarily stopped supporting the standard, there *was* uniformity in the x86 world . . . But, it appears to me that while your standards compliance is permantly broken (due, ironically, for backwards compatibility with your previous decision), the problem I was having with gcc misaligning arrays when a standard-compliant ABI is requested, has at least been solved in gcc 4.4. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38496
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-15 14:54 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2008-12-11 22:54 [Bug fortran/38496] New: " whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-11 23:03 ` [Bug fortran/38496] " whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-11 23:05 ` [Bug target/38496] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 23:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 23:26 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-11 23:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 23:44 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-12 0:02 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-12 0:53 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-12 1:06 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-12-12 1:26 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-12 1:50 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-15 0:23 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-15 14:54 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu [this message] 2008-12-15 18:19 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2008-12-15 21:34 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-15 21:39 ` Andrew Thomas Pinski 2008-12-15 21:40 ` pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-12-15 22:03 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-15 23:02 ` Andrew Pinski 2008-12-15 23:03 ` pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-12-15 23:40 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2008-12-16 0:10 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-03-18 13:25 ` sliwa at cft dot edu dot pl 2009-07-23 13:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-23 14:35 ` mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2009-07-24 12:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-24 17:05 ` whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2009-07-31 1:18 ` mikulas at artax dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2009-10-23 9:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org [not found] <bug-38496-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2014-02-16 13:12 ` jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20081215145251.10330.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).