This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Structure Return Testcase

To: Graham Stott <grahams at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: Structure Return Testcase
From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 15:30:07 -0800
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, law at redhat dot com, jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010315130847.A22538@redhat.com> <20010315145732U.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <3AB14F0E.930247B4@redhat.com>

On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:23:58PM +0000, Graham Stott wrote:
> Are the various API calling conventions w.r.t structure returns going
> to come into play here. The one I'm thing of is the hidden pointer how
> would the callee know to use memmove and not memcpy?

If the callee knew that the source of the copy was from the local
frame (or from malloced storage or any other non-aliased memory)
then it would know that it could use memcpy.  

Otherwise it would have to use memmove.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Structure Return Testcase
  - From: Mark Mitchell

References:
- Re: Structure Return Testcase
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Structure Return Testcase
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: Structure Return Testcase
  - From: Graham Stott

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