search for: intepend

...ers. Because target-independence is not possible in that kind of code. Some arguments... ** With builtins, we don't need ifdefs, if all compilers implement it. -- Yes, we do, for old compilers (GCC and Clang), and kernel/glibc will need it for decades to come ** Builtins make the code target-intependent -- No they don't, only the register part. The rest of the code surrounding is highly target-specific. That's because you only need that level of detail on code that is very target specific. That kind of code is normally in separate files. ** Builtins remove the need for named registers...

Folks, I just had a discussion about __builtin_stack_pointer in the GCC list, and there were a number of arguments against it, and it got me thinking I didn't have strong arguments against GNU's named register extension. Does anyone remember the arguments for not implementing that extension? My view is that making it an intrinsic (say @llvm.register(name)) would have the exact same