Dan Sugalski wrote:
[ lotta explanation skipped ]
Objects first, though--PDD 15 beckons. *Then* you and I can work out the
fuzzy bits so it both makes sense and IMCC can work with it well.
Thanks for the details. And as objects probably will shed some more
light on calling conventions, I'm fin
At 8:33 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 6:03 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So my proposal is, to reduce the amount of parameters passed in registers
Okay, done! Checkin to follow soon.
Wow, really fast, thanks.
Still remaing - probably /me not unders
At 8:33 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 6:03 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So my proposal is, to reduce the amount of parameters passed in registers
Okay, done! Checkin to follow soon.
Wow, really fast, thanks.
Still remaing - probably /me not unders
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 6:03 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So my proposal is, to reduce the amount of parameters passed in
registers
Okay, done! Checkin to follow soon.
Wow, really fast, thanks.
Still remaing - probably /me not understanding the following:
The following reg
At 6:03 PM +0100 3/12/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So my proposal is, to reduce the amount of parameters passed in
registers to some lower value, to take some pressure off the
register allocator.
x5 through x15
would be still a lot of params.
Okay, done! Checkin to follow soon.
--
Thinking a little bit more about parrot calling conventions and register
assignment, I fear that the described calling conventions can't be done.
The pod states:
I5 through I31
The first 26 integer parameters.
S5 through S31
The first 27 string parameters.
