Re: ffcall

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Feb 19 12:19, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 2/19/2015 11:46 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
> >On 2/19/2015 10:43 AM, Reini Urban wrote:
> >>On 02/19/2015 10:38 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>On Feb 18 17:41, Ken Brown wrote:
> >>>Help with basic x86_64 assembler is ok, I did it for Cygwin with help
> >>>from Kai Tietz.
> >>>
> >>>The main difference to Linux you have to look out for is the different
> >>>calling convention and how the registers are used:
> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions#Microsoft_x64_calling_convention
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>So the job is typically to rearrange the register usage and to
> >>>account for the only four registers used for the first arguments
> >>>to a function, rather than the 6 registers in the SYSV ABI.
> >>>>I might give it a try at some point, but I'm not highly motivated
> >>>>unless
> >>>>someone who really cares about clisp steps forward to help.  I'll
> >>>>concentrate first on seeing if I can get some 64-bit version of
> >>>>clisp built
> >>>>without ffcall.
> >>Should be doable without.
> >
> >Yes, it seems to be.  So far I've built and am testing a version with no
> >non-default modules, and with the default regexp module disabled.  I had
> >to do the latter because of the gcc problem I encountered while trying
> >to compile regexi.c:
> >
> >    https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64939
> >
> >The same sort of error occurs with several other modules.
> 
> I tried to test my build by using it to build xindy.  It appeared to work,
> as far as it went, but it didn't go too far because xindy requires the
> regexp module.  So I think I'm stuck until the gcc problem is resolved.

Does it build with the former gcc 4.8.3, by any chance?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: pgpT5V3WQQOwW.pgp
Description: PGP signature