Re: Help on code generation and register allocation

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
17 Feb 2006 00:10:15 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation avayvod@gmail.com (Whywhat) (2006-02-11)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation u.hobelmann@web.de (Ulrich Hobelmann) (2006-02-12)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation avayvod@gmail.com (Whywhat) (2006-02-14)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation u.hobelmann@web.de (Ulrich Hobelmann) (2006-02-14)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation torbenm@app-5.diku.dk (2006-02-17)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation boldyrev@cgitftp.uiggm.nsc.ru (Ivan Boldyrev) (2006-02-17)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation fw@deneb.enyo.de (Florian Weimer) (2006-02-17)
Re: Help on code generation and register allocation Forum.Thomas.Krause@gmx.de (Thomas Krause) (2006-02-20)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 17 Feb 2006 00:10:15 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 06-02-055 06-02-072 06-02-088 06-02-096 06-02-103
Keywords: optimize, GCC

* Ulrich Hobelmann:


> If tail recursion were completely target independent (and an
> optimization), I don't see why not all compilers would Just Do It.
> Especially GCC in Intel doesn't do it (except maybe for
> self-tail-recursion),


GCC does perform tail-call optimization on i386 for the SYSV ABI
(non-PIC). The calling convention is quite unproblematic in this
regard. Other architectures feature things like caller-saved
registers which are clobbered by inter-module calls, and tail calls
conforming to the platform ABI are very hard (if not impossible).



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.