> I actually don't like this approach, because this depends a lot of > decisions made in the code generator: the copy may be in registers > (hopefully) or on the stack, or with some magic funny thing. Adding > an extra copy at the llvm level would require the codegen to remove > it, which is really hard.
No, the idea is that all the frame allocation and manipulation would be done in the FE. So, from a BE point of view, all arguments would be on registers. For example, when compiling C on a i686 all resulting llvm functions would hove only one argument (the frame pointer). Again, this would be a massive change. For the current bug I believe that the "byval" proposal is much easier to implement. > > -Chris Cheers, -- Rafael Avila de Espindola Google Ireland Ltd. Gordon House Barrow Street Dublin 4 Ireland Registered in Dublin, Ireland Registration Number: 368047 _______________________________________________ llvm-commits mailing list llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
