Re: backend question

"Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de> writes:
|> felix wrote:
|> > On the other hand several people seem to work towards providing TCO
|> > for GCC (I just read one or two papers, though - I don't know what the
|> > current state of affairs is).
|>
|> Last time I heard anything, its state was "it works but the
|> opportunities for actually applying the optimization are quite rare". It
|> was a long list of requirements that the C function should fulfill.
|> The one keyword that stuck with me was setjmp/longjmp, but that was just
|> one entry in a far-too-long-for-my-taste list of potential TCO inhibitors.


Unless I have missed something fundamental, that restriction is only
to the use of setjmp in a function being optimised to remove its
return. Not a big deal. There is a much nastier one to do with never
passing the address of a local variable to an external function.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email: nmm1@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.