Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- From: Tim Roberts <timr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:50:00 -0800
"Eugene Gershnik" <gershnik@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>OTOH if you have situations like
>
>foo(a,b,c);
>bar(a,b,c);
>
>the caller cannot reuse the stack and has to push twice.
>Whether you gain or loose depends on what you do in performance critical
>code.
However, no C compiler has ever generated code to take advantage of that
"feature", and I don't believe I have ever seen it even in assembly code.
So, instead of "on the other hand", I think I'd say "on the tip of the
other little fingernail".
--
- Tim Roberts, timr@xxxxxxxxx
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- From: Eugene Gershnik
- Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- References:
- Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- From: Eugene Gershnik
- Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- Prev by Date: Re: Combined usage of exception handling
- Next by Date: Newbie: Simple program crashes on close
- Previous by thread: Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- Next by thread: Re: __cdecl vs __stdcall
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading