GDC review process.

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 20-06-2012 01:55, Timon Gehr wrote:
> 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?

Not that I can see from http://dlang.org/abi.html ?

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex at lycus.org
http://lycus.org