This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: tail call optimizations

To: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
Subject: Re: tail call optimizations
From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:04:24 -0800
Cc: rearnsha at arm dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <200003201213.MAA06246@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> <29008.953573928@upchuck>

On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 10:38:48AM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>   > PS.  You, or was it Mark, said that some of the code would probably go 
>   > when we moved to a tree-based implementation.  Will that still work with 
>   > tail-calling libcalls?  (For that matter, does the current implementation 
>   > work with libcalls?)
> Not sure if it works with libcalls.  Good question.

It doesn't.  Though there's no reason for it except that
libcalls don't share enough code with normal calls.


r~

References:
- Re: tail call optimizations
  - From: Richard Earnshaw
- Re: tail call optimizations
  - From: Jeffrey A Law

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]