From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5086 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2002 20:27:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5071 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2002 20:27:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU) (128.250.1.22) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2002 20:27:25 -0000 Received: from ceres.cs.mu.oz.au (mail@ceres.cs.mu.OZ.AU [128.250.25.4]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU with ESMTP id GAA22424; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:28:21 +1100 (EST) Received: from fjh by ceres.cs.mu.oz.au with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18BKEN-0001Ij-00; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:28:19 +1100 Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:27:00 -0000 From: Fergus Henderson To: Casper Hornstrup Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fastcall support on cygwin and mingw targets Message-ID: <20021111192817.GA13166@ceres.cs.mu.oz.au> References: <20021111015042.GA1711@ceres.cs.mu.oz.au> <003d01c289b7$6d2a89c0$0300000a@csiteoffice.csite.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <003d01c289b7$6d2a89c0$0300000a@csiteoffice.csite.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00694.txt.bz2 On 11-Nov-2002, Casper Hornstrup wrote: > > > What happens if a function has multiple attributes, > > e.g. both fastcall and stdcall or both fastcall and > > regparm(3)? It may be worth adding a test for that case. > > > > stdcall attribute after fastcall attribute - fastcall calling > convention is used, but the symbol is prefixed with _ not @. > > Obviously a bug, but how should this situation be handled? > Which attribute should win and should gcc emit a warning or > error out? > > fastcall attribute after stdcall attribute - same result. > fastcall attribute after regparm(3) attribute - fastcall wins. > regparm(3) attribute after fastcall attribute - fastcall wins. IMHO the desirable behaviour is for gcc to report an error in all of these cases. > > >+ The @code{fastcall} calling convention exists in Windows NT for Intel > > >+ processors only. > > > > That part of the documentation is wrong. > > Cygwin and Mingw work on most variants of Windows, not just > > Windows NT. > > I think it is a reference to fastcall only being used on Intel > Windows NT platforms (eg. it was not used on Windows NT/Alpha). > Maybe it should be removed? Either that, or just delete the "NT". -- Fergus Henderson | "I have always known that the pursuit The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit" WWW: | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.