From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <27ac23f8fcf4a0acb0e54d9621d9bffb@coraid.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] bug in asm.ps
From: Brantley Coile <brantley@coraid.com>
Date: Mon,  6 Mar 2006 11:22:26 -0500
In-Reply-To: <c44e01d0f480a2fba457c2756dd7140b@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0cb476a8-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Then I don't know what the word `automatic' means for an assembler.

> I still don't know what you think is wrong.
> Are you referring to the order in which stack
> variables are allocated in the stack frame?
> (I thought you were referring to the placement
> of temporaries to hold function call parameters.)
> All the compilers allocate their stack frames the
> same way, as far as I can tell.  But I don't see
> asm.ps making claims about what the correspondence
> between assembly and C is.  First and last
> depend on your point of view.
>
> Russ