You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What if we force the compiler to use register bank switching instead of the stack?
Would the compiler still generate abra @R13++,!v to return?
For the return itself, on the first glance this seems correct. BUT:
As described in #179 (comment), this would be wrong, because in case of register banking, the "return statement" aka abra @R13++,!v would need to do a DECRB first.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This issue steps from this comment: #179 (comment)
Given a C program like this:
The generated assembly for the function
f()
is:What if we force the compiler to use register bank switching instead of the stack?
Would the compiler still generate
abra @R13++,!v
to return?For the return itself, on the first glance this seems correct. BUT:
As described in #179 (comment), this would be wrong, because in case of register banking, the "return statement" aka
abra @R13++,!v
would need to do aDECRB
first.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: