RFA: xscale-elf -mstrict-prototypes
Mark Mitchell
mark@codesourcery.com
Wed Mar 3 01:29:00 GMT 2004
> 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
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list