On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 8:34:49 PM UTC+1, klau...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, 10 March 2016 11:22:22 UTC+1, minux wrote:

2. make otherwise portable Go packages tied to a particular implementation
(the incompatibility of gc/gccgo assembly makes things worse.)
gccgo is definitely currently an issue, but is there anything stopping an
eager spirit from adding assembler support to gccgo?
One issue might be ABI, for compatibility with gccgo, and for our own
benefit of eventually improving the current quite inefficient ABI.

Are ABI improvements in any roadmap of the SSA team?

Giovanni Bajo

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 8 of 11 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-dev @
postedMar 10, '16 at 10:22a
activeMar 11, '16 at 9:27p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase