Bad codegen for ARM (and maybe others) when optimizing

[David Nadlinger via digitalmars-d-ldc]

On Tuesday, 10 February 2015 at 06:07:54 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
> I prefer if you follow the D ABI. My impression is that the 
> difference between fastcc and the standard calling convention 
> is not really great, at least on non-x86 systems.

To further put this into context: LDC supported non-x86_32 
platforms before the D spec ABI had that "just as C" clause. 
Walter's position once explicitly was that on non-x86 platforms, 
other compilers are "free to innovate", but that seems to have 
changed.

And in my opinion, rightfully so. We need C ABI compatibility on 
all the platforms anyway, and there is little reason to also 
maintain a second ABI implementation. We can still relax the ABI 
on the IR transformation level for internal function when we are 
doing LTO anyway (LLVM does this by default).

David