Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Thad Smith <ThadSmith@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:35:50 -0700
Walter Bright wrote:
"Thad Smith" <ThadSmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in messageIn C, you could easily use called function stack cleanup for all non-variadic functions, I would think. The compiler could even have a compatibility mode, for caller cleanup, and different entry point naming prefix for faster calling mode, couldn't it?
Many C compilers offer extensions for more efficient calling sequences, but they are non-standard.
By non-standard, I assume you mean not compatible with older compilers, not non-compliant with the C standard.
-- Thad .
- References:
- Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: sonugeetha@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Walter Bright
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Walter Bright
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Thad Smith
- Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- From: Walter Bright
- Why We Use C Than C++...
- Prev by Date: Re: detect necessary #includes
- Next by Date: Re: wait in c
- Previous by thread: Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- Next by thread: Re: Why We Use C Than C++...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|