[cfe-dev] naked attribute
t.p.northover at gmail.com
Thu May 2 14:11:18 PDT 2013
A case for __attribute__((stark_naked))?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Reed,
>> I propose to make the following change to clang.
>> In the presence of the "naked" attribute, in cases where clang would
>> normally implicitly emit a "return" instruction, it should emit an
>> "unreachable" instruction.
> I'd have loved to if we were designing the attribute from scratch; I
> think the semantics would definitely be better. Unfortunately GCC got
> there first, and at least on AArch64 it also puts the implicit return
> in. I'll check AArch32 at work tomorrow.
> If so, there's a real risk of breaking compatibility if anyone
> actually uses naked functions already. Not a fatal barrier, but one we
> should consider carefully.
More information about the cfe-dev