Hi Xavi and All, On 2010 Feb 11, at 16:23, Xavi wrote:
> Hi Viktor, > >> That can work, but it means we don't support int64/double >> parameters and int64/double/float/char return values anymore. >> >> Currently we do, so maybe it'd be good to take care of it. >> >> We should also support both cdecl and stdcall versions. > > Yes I know, this is not perfect. > Also I just think, that in C, we can not *force* (yes or yes) the use of CPU > registers AFAIK. We don't need to, if we keep the whole thing on C level. > IMHO this solution could work with majority calls, to the rest is easier and > safer to make a private/local wrapper. > So I think that's good if it works with other compilers because the > alternative is keep all hbwin outside present and future optimizations for > this ASM hard code. Perhaps it's better separate this function to other > optional library. The .c source file is about 100MB if we create separate function skeletons for all combinations, so it's not something realistic. (or maybe I'm wrong and it can be reduced using tricks) I can easily implement pure .c win32 .dll call support which drops support for int64/double parameters and int64/double/float return values. I'd also guess they are not very widely used, so it's probably not a big loss. Any opinion on that? Brgds, Viktor _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
