This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- From: Matthijs van Duin <matthijsvanduin at gmail dot com>
- To: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- Cc: Richard Smith <richard at metafoo dot co dot uk>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists dot llvm dot org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:03:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMe9rOrsV-zohnj=31_DDYSxUDyRDYL0anTi_NJm5vqogF9URQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqQLZgEfMBDudAekW_DUDJbofx+bj-O753Brk4YrREa+w at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAOfiQqnyde8eJPsNi=WhmGexZawD9efzeRKX7xgCN39D39BZtg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOoZa7se3JGFy-LMfQETWYHKUXg_jpvcgGfxNvPw+23Byg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAOfiQqnwP=7Kitkmjm_Vs-FqrD+ro6rOb=NjVBey3h-xJE+7ww at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOr4rr1SRVXnkGoZD0Jf46w0TuQKiAVgHRg9nCd0PkV0hA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAOfiQqmk-h6X1iC+jz70UCyGOAaXJ6f1nuEK64R9Zqir7B=WOA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqfoW1hqF=nDKbDb3hPEmhb_3U4KMu8HKqoAmdt6_ofJA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAOfiQq=MJXKNvWYkFsiO07J2Ovf5L-XPv9mNiV-1rY3uQEQFng at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOpnxH2Ccz7L7G6U_GpoMT0UE+E82sRxSfjg-vQP3tTDUA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAOfiQqmJE=9HZHyTu-n+FXzh9JiP3NBEFd_rKcUBPjNPcF=e_Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqvVg7fHzTT8g76-1NSD8F-2Qa1hRN5kV-vNPTTopxWPA at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 20 dot 1602181531140 dot 20277 at wotan dot suse dot de> <CAOfiQq=BnUC-uXcgNTNDXuLMfE9aRgNBvQ8zuPJN0WnPkCD8rw at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 20 dot 1602191344231 dot 20277 at wotan dot suse dot de>
On 19 February 2016 at 14:35, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
> struct S {
> S() {something();}
> };
>
> would be an empty type, and that's not what we want.
Why not? The default constructor is never invoked as part of passing
such an object around. Its copy constructor is a nop and requires no
reference to the original object.
Matthijs van Duin
- References:
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct
- Re: RFC: Update Intel386, x86-64 and IA MCU psABIs for passing/returning empty struct