RFA: xscale-elf -mstrict-prototypes

[Mark Mitchell]

> I am trying to avoid the overhead of conditioning a shorter-than-int
> parameter in the callee.  

Yes -- but I believe that is exactly the case that will be fixed in 
AACPS.  I might be wrong, though.

> int
> main (int argc, char *argv[])
> {
>   return addhi3 (40000, -50000);
> }
> This call will pass out of range values to addhi3 which is incorrect but
> may happen in existing code.

We don't have to worry about that case, since, as you say, its invalid.

I believe that GCC is doing the conditioning at both the caller and 
callee currently.  It should be necessary to do it on only one side or 
the other.  Therefore, I think that we should eliminate that 
duplication, rather than add -mstrict-prototypes.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com