On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 11:21:24PM -0000, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Earlier today I checked in a change that lets you add a :non_volatile flag
> to a local or parameter.
>
> .param int i :non_volatile
> .local int j :non_volatile
>
> This says to the register allocator "don't re-use the register that this
> parameter or local goes in to",
Please revert this change, and refrain from checking in user-visible or
design-significant changes to the core until I've OK'd them.
If this feature is necessary (which it may be), the name "non_volatile" is
misleading to the point of being dead wrong ("volatility" in the C sense is
not exactly a helpful meme in Parrot land). And it's ugly: negative options
are usually not unbad. And this one definitely is. (Or is it 'not'? ... I
hate negative options.)
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
