Am 19.08.2016 10:56 schrieb "OBones" <obo...@free.fr>: > > Sven Barth wrote: > >> >> Am 19.08.2016 09:55 schrieb "Jonas Maebe" <jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be <mailto:jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be>>: >> > As alluded to above, LLVM support needs to be added/tested/maintained >> > separately for each supported architecture and to a lesser extent for >> > each supported OS. Right now, I only have plans for x86-64 and AArch64 >> > (and maybe PowerPC64), on Darwin and Linux. Personally, I won't add >> > support for Windows since I don't use that platform. Support for 32 bit >> > platforms in general will be a bit tricky due to the way our compiler is >> > structured. >> >> Why is it that 32-bit targets would be a bit tricky to implement? >> >> Regards, >> Sven >> > I believe because of this: > > > There are also a few LLVM limitations over which I have no influence: > <snip> > > b) LLVM has no support for the i386 "register" calling convention, so I > will probably never add support for the i386 target using LLVM
Jonas wrote about the structure of the compiler. "register" support is not about the structure, it's merely an additional calling convention. Regards, Sven
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
