Related articles |
---|
Parameter Passing Via Registers lins@apple.com (Chuck Lins) (1991-04-29) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers preston@ariel.rice.edu (1991-04-30) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers mike@taumet.com (1991-04-30) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers zlsiial@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk (A. V. Le Blanc) (1991-04-30) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers mike@yalla.tuwien.ac.at (1991-04-30) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers ram+@cs.cmu.edu (Rob MacLachlan) (1991-05-01) |
Re: Parameter Passing Via Registers mauney@eos.ncsu.edu (1991-05-02) |
[4 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | Chuck Lins <lins@apple.com> |
Keywords: | optimize, registers, Pascal, Modula |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
Date: | 29 Apr 91 13:54:04 |
Execution units are the enforcement agents of the RISC revolution.
Does anyone know how nested procedures affect the ability to pass parameters
via registers? If there was no up-level access everything would work fine,
but with this facility you get all sorts of problems. Uplevel access would
also seem to affect dataflow analysis (the compiler could think that a
variable is 'dead' when in reality it's going to get accessed by a nested
local procedure.
Maybe all the potential hair is why Pascal and Modula-2 compiler writers
just pass all parameters via the stack.
Are there (nice) solutions to these problems. References welcome.
Thanks in advance from,
Chuck Lins
lins@apple.com
[Can one reference a named parameter in an enclosing procedure? If so, I
can imagine that would force them onto the stack. -John]
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.