Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
05/16/07 22:48
Read: times


 		 #139411 - Caller-save vs. Callee-save
Responding to: ???'s previous message
Maarten said:
I think you're mistaking caller-saves to mean save only the registers that the callee promised to use.

You are correct. That is what I was thinking.

But usually it means the caller assumes everything can get thrashed and the caller must save everything it would like to keep beyond the call.

Hmm. I have actually never thought of doing it that way.

So both caller-saves and callee-saves are always about saving locally used registers.

Yes. In this way, Jan's idea of mixing the two doesn't sound quite as bad.

I can now see that there are tradeoffs both ways if you were writing ASM by hand. Just out of curiosity, is one way better or eaasier for a compiler?

-- Russ


List of 44 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
Weekend Quiz - easy            01/01/70 00:00      
   Dumbbbbbb            01/01/70 00:00      
      I know of 3, and it is \"synthtetic\"...            01/01/70 00:00      
   Hi Jan!            01/01/70 00:00      
      2 out of 3            01/01/70 00:00      
   Comment lies!            01/01/70 00:00      
      that makes 4... embarrassing            01/01/70 00:00      
         #4            01/01/70 00:00      
            N-th            01/01/70 00:00      
               Similar            01/01/70 00:00      
         Thats the one I saw first too !            01/01/70 00:00      
   Another lyin\' comment            01/01/70 00:00      
      Bingo!            01/01/70 00:00      
   seems solved - so now for the equivalent in C?            01/01/70 00:00      
      Oops            01/01/70 00:00      
         Gee ... it was just an 'x' ...            01/01/70 00:00      
            Yup ...            01/01/70 00:00      
            "just" an x ?            01/01/70 00:00      
   writing SBUF without checking?            01/01/70 00:00      
      well...            01/01/70 00:00      
      the REAL mistake is using an HLL rather than ASM            01/01/70 00:00      
         Not so            01/01/70 00:00      
   Shall we continue this???            01/01/70 00:00      
      the spec itself is problematic            01/01/70 00:00      
         How would you fix the spec?            01/01/70 00:00      
            handle DEL (0x7f) and BS?            01/01/70 00:00      
               throwing in something to chew on... :-)            01/01/70 00:00      
               Are DEL and BS equivalent ???            01/01/70 00:00      
                  relax.            01/01/70 00:00      
      ReceiveString, rev.1            01/01/70 00:00      
         ReceiveString, rev. 2            01/01/70 00:00      
            there are many ways...            01/01/70 00:00      
               Comments on comments on ...            01/01/70 00:00      
                  (comments on)^3            01/01/70 00:00      
                  Caller-saves            01/01/70 00:00      
                     Caller-save vs. Callee-save            01/01/70 00:00      
                        Compiler trade-off            01/01/70 00:00      
      ReceiveString, rev. 3            01/01/70 00:00      
   Sunday Challenge (rev 4)            01/01/70 00:00      
      hard to beat...            01/01/70 00:00      
         Just one more byte ...            01/01/70 00:00      
            want to spare bytes?            01/01/70 00:00      
               CALL vs ACALL            01/01/70 00:00      
                  it depends            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List