Wrapping around stdcall

[Felix Nawothnig]

Marcus Meissner wrote:
>>>Adding "thiscall" to gcc would perhaps help in the long run ... :/ Fun fun 
>>>fun...
>>Considering that gcc already knows regparm and we just need regparm(1) 
>>with ecx instead eax hacking in "thiscall" for C code shouldn't be too 
>>hard I think.
>>But since this would be a very Wine-specific hack I doubt it would get 
>>into GCC. The right way would probably to extend the regparm attribute 
>>to allow specifying arbitrary registers...
> No, we could just propose thiscall to the gcc folks.

We can propose whatever we want - that's no argument at all. :-)

My point is, as pointed out before, "thiscall" doesn't really make sense 
in C context. The only use for this would be binary-compatibility with 
MSVC C++ when using C - even more since true MSVC C++ compatiblity would 
still be missing.

I don't think such an application-specific hack belongs into a compiler 
- especially if it can be avoided by extending an already existing 
feature (regparm) in a generic way.

This would also allow binary-compatibility to the ABI of FooSoft which 
thought it would be nifty to pass the first argument in EDX.

> In short and mid term this needs to be fixed with above hack or so.

You mean the macros we are using right now? Sure.

Felix