Hi! On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:24:10PM +0200, Oliver Schmidt wrote: > 1. Does the above hold true when the optimizer is activated? Yes. > 2. Does it make sense to presume that the overall codesize of a > program is reduced with fastcall as the call to the push functions is > omitted from the call sites (presuming that functions are called from > more than one site)? Yes. > 3. If fastcall isn't beneficial for C functions then why are the C > library functions written in C prototyped with fastcall? It is beneficial, since it reduces the size of the program, even when used with C programs. In case of the library functions, the reasons were: * Small reduce in code size * Common interface (have all library functions use the same convention) * No change in the header when rewriting the function in asm Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz@musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Tue Apr 27 23:33:40 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2010-04-27 23:33:43 CEST