From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 13 21:43:15 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848471065677
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:43:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from smtp.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431BA8FC15
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:43:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [84.49.246.2])
	by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43DDA1FFC33;
	Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:43:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 11C8284488; Sun, 13 Jun 2010 23:41:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: ticso@cicely.de
References: <20100611162118.GR39829@acme.spoerlein.net>
	<867hm5tl6u.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100612153526.GA3632@acme.spoerlein.net>
	<20100612163208.GS87112@cicely7.cicely.de> <864oh86tnl.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20100612225216.GT87112@cicely7.cicely.de> <86k4q33pk2.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20100613160035.GD87112@cicely7.cicely.de> <86fx0q52r0.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20100613162841.GE87112@cicely7.cicely.de>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 23:41:03 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20100613162841.GE87112@cicely7.cicely.de> (Bernd Walter's
	message of "Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:28:41 +0200")
Message-ID: <86bpbe4nm8.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.95 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Cleanup for cryptographic algorithms vs. compiler optimizations
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:43:15 -0000

Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de> writes:
> Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav <des@des.no> writes:
> > The only way you can tell that gcc did it is if you break the rules,
> > such as by defining your own version of printf() or puts().
> Our loader stages do this for good reasons.  And in microcontroller
> programming (surely out of FreeBSD scope) it is done very regulary.

Those are freestanding environments, where printf() and puts() don't
exist as far as the C standard is concerned.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no