[M3devel] nested functions vs. setjmp vs. inlining

[Tony Hosking]

This is a shame.
1. gcc supports nested functions.
2. gcc supports inlining.
3. gcc should work with both nested functions and inlining.

If gcc can handle all of this for C but not M3 then we must be doing something wrong.
Can we see how similar code fragments behave when expressed in C?

On Nov 19, 2010, at 4:12 AM, Jay K wrote:

> parse.c:
> /* don't inline anything, to fix:
> elego/m3msh/src/M3MiniShell.m3: In function 'M3MiniShell__ProcessParameters':
> elego/m3msh/src/M3MiniShell.m3:608:0: error: variable '_nonlocal_var_rec.188' might be clobbered by 'longjmp' or 'vfork'
> */
> 
> 
> I'm very welling to make an extra pass through the IR, and only turn off inlining if I see both nested functions and calls to setjmp/longjmp/fork/vfork.
> Oh, and a use of a static link.
> I wouldn't check for their intersection.
> Most modules wouldn't have any nested functions. And then sometimes nested functions are only nested to limit their use.
> 
> I tried selectively disabling inlining. No luck.
>   I might try again, but don't plan on success there.
> 
> 
> OK?
> 
> 
> Fixing this "properly" I'm not keen on doing right now either, as I already spent a while trying to figure out how and failed.
> (not to mention my keenness for evading this issue entirely, such as by using C or having the frontend transform away nested functions...)
> 
> 
>  - Jay

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20101119/e5c0eb87/attachment-0002.html>