Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Interrupt handling

[Borja F. <bor...@gm...>]

Eric in case you're not following the "Current status?" thread, please
check it out, I have a question for you there in the last message.

2012/3/6 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...>

>
> Agreed. ;-)
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm...]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 12:44 PM
> > To: Weddington, Eric
> > Cc: avr...@li...
> > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Interrupt handling
> >
> > In my opinion the best thing should be to error out, it doesn't make
> sense to
> > set this attributes in non void functions. Technically from a codegen
> > perspective it doesn't matter because registers are all saved and
> restored
> > unless the naked attrib is set so it wouldnt't make a difference
> except for
> > some useless instructions. Doing this kind of things shows that the
> programmer
> > doesn't understand what he's doing.
> > I issued the warning to be sort of backwards compat with gcc, although
> in this
> > case we would be supporting wrong code. In conclusion, error out.
> >
> >
>