GDC review process.

[Timon Gehr]

On 06/20/2012 12:47 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 19-06-2012 23:52, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/19/2012 1:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
>>>> No, but the idea was to allow D to innovate on calling
>>>> conventions without disturbing code that needed to
>>>> interface with C.
>>>
>>> The idea is nice, but ideas aren't enough. Where are the benchmarks
>>> that show a
>>> performance improvement over the C calling convention? And even if such
>>> improvement is present, is it worth it in the face of people that
>>> don't want to
>>> add it to GCC?
>>
>> GDC can certainly define its D calling convention to match GCC's. It's
>> an "implementation defined" thing, not a language defined one.
>>
>
> Then let's please rename it to the DMD ABI instead of calling it the D
> ABI and making it look like it's part of the language on the website.
> Further, D mangling rules should be separate from calling convention.
>

IIRC currently, the calling convention is mangled into the symbol name.
Do you want to remove this?