Will the D GC be awesome?

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 10-10-2012 14:05, Marco Leise wrote:
> Am Thu, 04 Oct 2012 15:27:58 +0200
> schrieb Alex Rønne Petersen <alex at lycus.org>:
>
>> On 04-10-2012 15:21, Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
>>> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> […]
>>> * For other struct sizes, the return value is stored through a hidden
>>> pointer passed as an argument to the function.
>>
>> I strongly advise ignoring the D calling convention. Only DMD implements
>> it and nowhere else than on Windows for 32-bit x86.
>>
>> Instead, refer to the Windows and System V x86 ABIs.
>
> The hidden pointer is exactly what I see MSVC++ produce for
> struct returns (but even for 4 byte ones). e.g. "MyStruct
> foo()" is equivalent to "foo(MyStruct&)"
> I understand that the GCC people don't want to add YACC (yet
> another calling-convention), but frankly Pascal got away with
> a c-c of its own, too and I never heard anyone complain.
> I mean aside from compiler implementations, what's the problem
> with an own calling convention for D code calling D code if it
> is more efficient?
>

The problem is ABI specification. Right now, you can't reliably write 
inline assembly in D because all the compilers use different calling 
conventions for extern (D).

Also, the Pascal calling convention is only supported by very few 
compilers today.

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