On Dec 30, 2011, at 3:20 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> currently alpha/vms backend emits a trampoline entry point for all nested
>>> functions. This is a wast
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 03:20:30PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Err - are not _all_ backends using trampolines to represent address-taken
> nested functions? At least I remeber to see them for x86 and plain C
Targets using function descriptors (powerpc64-*linux*,
powerpc*-*aix*, ia64-*) don't
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> currently alpha/vms backend emits a trampoline entry point for all nested
>> functions. This is a waste of code space, as although nested functions are
>> very common
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently alpha/vms backend emits a trampoline entry point for all nested
> functions. This is a waste of code space, as although nested functions are
> very common in Ada, address of nested functions are only seldom taken.
>
> T
Hi,
currently alpha/vms backend emits a trampoline entry point for all nested
functions. This is a waste of code space, as although nested functions are
very common in Ada, address of nested functions are only seldom taken.
The fact that the address of a function is taken seems only be availab
