Hi, SDCC people!
> Do we need a separate macro? There will be a bump in the minor version
> > number anyway, so you could test for that (or test for the revision, as
> > I do to deal with old char getchar(void) vs current int getchar(void)).
> If besides a function modifier there will also be a
Philipp Klaus Krause schreef op 2021-06-29 12:03:
Am 29.06.21 um 10:22 schrieb Павел Бельтюков:
It would be great if there was some macro definition indicating
calling
convention at compile time.
In such case we could do something like that:
void some_func()
{
__asm
#ifdef
Am 29.06.21 um 10:22 schrieb Павел Бельтюков:
> It would be great if there was some macro definition indicating calling
> convention at compile time.
> In such case we could do something like that:
>
> void some_func()
> {
> __asm
> #ifdef __SDCC_STM8_CALL_LEGACY
> /*Legacy
Hi, Philipp!
When in the future the new calling convention is made the default in
> trunk, a way to indicate the use of the old calling convention (maybe
> __sdccoldcall or so) will be introduced to use the old calling
> convention for individual functions. Maybe __sdccoldcall, __stackcall or
> so
Am 29.06.21 um 00:38 schrieb Basil Hussain:
>
> If you are adding these attribute keywords, would it then be possible to
> have one to dictate, per function, the use of the old purely-stack-based
> calling convention? I think this would be a good idea for the sake of
> backwards compatibility, so
It was not a goal for the new calling convention. However, for those
that want binary / asm compability, I introduced the __raisonance,
__comsic, __iar keywords, to explicitly use the calling convention of a
compiler for an individual function.
If you are adding these attribute keywords, woul
Basil Hussain wrote on 2021-06-25 21:01:
Personally, my comments are that I think the proposed new calling
convention will make life difficult when writing assembly code that is
to be called by C code. In my opinion, the current STM8 calling
convention suits that scenario just fine.
In my exper
Am 25.06.21 um 21:01 schrieb Basil Hussain:
> What is the motivation and benefits for changing the calling convention?
> I was sure I remembered you posting before sometime on one of the
> mailing lists about changing the STM8 calling convention with some
> reasons, but I can't find anything now.
>
What is the motivation and benefits for changing the calling convention?
I was sure I remembered you posting before sometime on one of the
mailing lists about changing the STM8 calling convention with some
reasons, but I can't find anything now.
Personally, my comments are that I think the pro
