[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at t
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that |
Date: |
Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:54:57 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:43:08PM +0100, address@hidden wrote:
> > > So if we could convince the C compiler to pass the argvector - and as we
> > > where about changing things the argument count too - in a global
> > > *register* variable, then we needed zero allocation for most cps calls.
>
> Careful. Global register variables increase register pressure in the compiler,
> expose optimizer bugs and aren't overly portable. A simple static variable
> should
> be the better alternative.
How about the stack-allocated vector I proposed? It'd also be the
smallest change from what we currently have, I think.
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/16
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Peter Bex, 2016/02/16
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, felix . winkelmann, 2016/02/16
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that,
Peter Bex <=
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/17
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/17
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/19
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Peter Bex, 2016/02/19
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/19
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Peter Bex, 2016/02/19
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Argvector handling - maybe we could do better at that, Jörg F . Wittenberger, 2016/02/23