Re: [RFA] alloca coding standard

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

Nick Duffek wrote:
> 
> On 11-Nov-2000, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> >To decide it is appropriate I think there need to be some clear and
> >objective guidelines.
> 
> How about this?  The appended patch:

>   - Documents the de facto coding standard of allowing limited alloca()
>     allocations.  I've set the limit at 1 page per function; does anyone
>     think it should be less, more, or specified in bytes instead of pages?

I'd suggest first allowing for the discussion which is clarifying all
the issues to settle down and only after that start looking at something
recording guidelines for alloca.  (I really don't see the urgency on
this).

	Andrew

>   - Moves an alloca (0) call from registers_changed() to
>     wait_for_inferior(), so that the documentation can say:

This is a separate problem and not part of the patch.