|Parameter Passing Via Registers firstname.lastname@example.org (Chuck Lins) (1991-04-29)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers email@example.com (1991-04-30)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-04-30)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers email@example.com (A. V. Le Blanc) (1991-04-30)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-04-30)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers email@example.com (Rob MacLachlan) (1991-05-01)|
|Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-05-02)|
|[4 later articles]|
|From:||Chuck Lins <email@example.com>|
|Keywords:||optimize, registers, Pascal, Modula|
|Date:||29 Apr 91 13:54:04|
Execution units are the enforcement agents of the RISC revolution.
Does anyone know how nested procedures affect the ability to pass parameters
via registers? If there was no up-level access everything would work fine,
but with this facility you get all sorts of problems. Uplevel access would
also seem to affect dataflow analysis (the compiler could think that a
variable is 'dead' when in reality it's going to get accessed by a nested
Maybe all the potential hair is why Pascal and Modula-2 compiler writers
just pass all parameters via the stack.
Are there (nice) solutions to these problems. References welcome.
Thanks in advance from,
[Can one reference a named parameter in an enclosing procedure? If so, I
can imagine that would force them onto the stack. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.