Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 00:41:59 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: GCC-3 additions Message-ID: <20011014004159.A3001@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com References: <20011013232846 DOT A2364 AT redhat DOT com> <20011014043215 DOT 57603 DOT qmail AT web14504 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20011014043215.57603.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 02:32:15PM +1000, Danny Smith wrote: >>I'd like to have fastcall conventions. I think it is necessary if we >>want gcc to be a replacement for MSVC. >> >I'll need to think about that. Do I really want that? I'd say that you would for your own peace of mind. It cuts down on the "This compile well using Microsoft! Why it not gcc!" types of complaints. >> Out of curiousity, how does fastcall differ from attribute ((regparm >> (n)))? >> > >Like stdcall, callee pops the stacks. In addition fastcall allocates the >first two DWORD (SImode) or smaller arguments to ECX and EDX. > >MS fastcall symbols have decoration similar to stdcall but with leading @ >eg @foo AT nn/_imp_ AT foo@nn (note no underscore between _imp_ and @) Duh, right. Thanks for the explanation. I actually knew all of this once when I used to write fastcall functions in assembly. I'll probably ask you to explain it again in four years. :-) cgf