[LLVMdev] Removing -tailcallopt?

[james woodyatt]

On Feb 5, 2010, at 15:35, Evan Cheng wrote:
> 
> I've added tail call optimization to x86. This is different from what -tailcallopt does, which forces fastcc function to be tail callable. My changes detect opportunities to do tail call without having to change the ABI.

+1 for opportunistically optimizing tail calls in the "ccc" convention during x86 assembly generation.  This is a desirable feature.

> Does anyone actually using it?  I'd prefer to just remove it to clean up the implementation if no one has any objections.


-1 for removing the guaranteed tail call feature of the "fastcc" convention.  As others have noted, there are several projects (mine included) that require the "tail" call site qualifier in the IR language.


—
j h woodyatt <jhw at conjury.org>
http://jhw.vox.com/