On 12/29/18 12:53 PM, Remus Clearwater wrote: > B. The calling of those un-inlined static C functions does not have to > comply with the function calling sequence defined in the ABI spec. And > because the calling of the function pointers which are pointing to the > static C functions has to work correctly as the C standard described, so it > is the compiler's free will to decide any "calling sequence" that as long > as could satisfy both the Sys V ABI and the C standard. B is correct. We don't care about function pointers because we know if a static function has its address takes in the same compilation unit in which it appears. If it has not had its address taken, we don't have to care about the system ABI. If it has, then we need to use the system ABI. -- Andrew Haley Java Platform Lead Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
