Re: Which spec has defined the calling sequence of static C functions (like the extern C functions' has been defined in the Sys V ABI specs)?

[Remus Clearwater <remus.clearwater@gmail.com>]

>
> The compiler must obey the C standard and this is the reasonable way to
>>
> make it so.
>
>
> Yes, it is indeed a very reasonable and elegant way but maybe still not
> the only choice a C compiler could make. Say there is certain C compiler
> tool chain implementation named XCC:
>
> 1. XCC obey the Sys V ABI when calling extern C functions (same as GCC
> does).
> 2. XCC always use a self defined calling convention named
> XCC_CALL_For_Static_Functions to call the static C functions.
> 3. The XCC's XCC_CALL_For_Static_Functions is completely different from
> the calling sequence defined in the Sys V ABI.
> 4. Here is how XCC generated executable binaries (say XBIN for example)
> calling static C functions:
> 4.1. XBIN always maintain a set of all the extern functions' address, and
> the name of this set is "XSET".
> 4.2. When doing function call via any variable function pointers, it would
> check the XSET, if the function pointer pointing to an extern function it
> would choose to use the Sys V ABI Calling Sequence, otherwise the
> XCC_CALL_For_Static_Functions would be used.
> 4.3. For the calling of constant function pointers, XCC will try its best
> to optimize the process described in 4.2 above.
> 5. XCC obey the Sys V ABI and C specs.
>

Suddenly appear to me that it would be much tricky if some C library choose
to export an extern C function pointer variable. I didn't notice such
situation a moment ago.