c++ - __declspec(naked) - in DMC++?
- Matthew Wilson (2/2) Nov 13 2003 Does DMC support naked functions? If so, how?
- Walter (9/10) Nov 13 2003 __declspec(naked) int foo()
- Matthew Wilson (5/15) Nov 14 2003 Cool. :)
- Walter (4/6) Nov 14 2003 the
- Matthew Wilson (4/10) Nov 14 2003 I'll be able to let you know the accepted permutations by the end of tod...
- Matthew Wilson (5/15) Nov 16 2003 Given that it supports naked, the unvoiced translation of fastcall to cd...
- Walter (5/8) Nov 16 2003 cdecl
- Matthew Wilson (12/20) Nov 16 2003 But it is supported, in a way.
- Walter (4/13) Nov 16 2003 with
Does DMC support naked functions? If so, how? Thanks in advance
Nov 13 2003
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp1mbm$kn$1 digitaldaemon.com...Does DMC support naked functions? If so, how?__declspec(naked) int foo() { __asm { ... } }
Nov 13 2003
Cool. :) btw, do you know whether there's a consistent asm block keyword between the Win32 compilers? _asm / __asm / asm ?? "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:bp28fr$uof$2 digitaldaemon.com..."Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp1mbm$kn$1 digitaldaemon.com...Does DMC support naked functions? If so, how?__declspec(naked) int foo() { __asm { ... } }
Nov 14 2003
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp3c1k$2oe8$1 digitaldaemon.com...btw, do you know whether there's a consistent asm block keyword betweentheWin32 compilers? _asm / __asm / asm ??There isn't, though DMC will take 'em all.
Nov 14 2003
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> I'll be able to let you know the accepted permutations by the end of today. :( "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:bp3i48$u6$1 digitaldaemon.com..."Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp3c1k$2oe8$1 digitaldaemon.com...btw, do you know whether there's a consistent asm block keyword betweentheWin32 compilers? _asm / __asm / asm ??There isn't, though DMC will take 'em all.
Nov 14 2003
Given that it supports naked, the unvoiced translation of fastcall to cdecl is a manifest bug, surely? We need the compiler to issue an error when naked+fastcall are used "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:bp28fr$uof$2 digitaldaemon.com..."Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp1mbm$kn$1 digitaldaemon.com...Does DMC support naked functions? If so, how?__declspec(naked) int foo() { __asm { ... } }
Nov 16 2003
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp8n99$1qcs$1 digitaldaemon.com...Given that it supports naked, the unvoiced translation of fastcall tocdeclis a manifest bug, surely? We need the compiler to issue an error when naked+fastcall are usedExcept that fastcall is not supported at all, so I am not understanding what the issue is.
Nov 16 2003
But it is supported, in a way.
void __fastcall f()
{}
compiles without a murmur, and silently translates the __fastcall into a
cdecl. (Use your marvellous obj2asm if you don't believe me)
In combination with __declspec(naked), this is a seriously evil bug.
To my mind the whole thing should be an error. The minimum needed is for
__fastcall to produce a warning without __declspec(naked), and an error with
it.
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:bp967s$2h3s$1 digitaldaemon.com...
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message
news:bp8n99$1qcs$1 digitaldaemon.com...
Given that it supports naked, the unvoiced translation of fastcall to
cdecl
is a manifest bug, surely? We need the compiler to issue an error when
naked+fastcall are used
Except that fastcall is not supported at all, so I am not understanding
what
the issue is.
Nov 16 2003
"Matthew Wilson" <matthew-hat -stlsoft-dot.-org> wrote in message news:bp9aj8$2n3v$1 digitaldaemon.com...But it is supported, in a way. void __fastcall f() {} compiles without a murmur, and silently translates the __fastcall into a cdecl. (Use your marvellous obj2asm if you don't believe me) In combination with __declspec(naked), this is a seriously evil bug. To my mind the whole thing should be an error. The minimum needed is for __fastcall to produce a warning without __declspec(naked), and an errorwithit.Ok, I understand what you mean now.
Nov 16 2003