After bug 1770366 we can use `[rbp+N]` instead of `[rsp+N]` to access arguments and stack slots. (Wasm is already doing this for arguments but not stack slots.) On x86/x64, this saves one byte per instruction and has potentially [other benefits](https://stackoverflow.com/a/54348505). C/C++ compilers also prefer the frame pointer over the stack pointer if they're not omitting frame pointers. Using the frame pointer is also less error-prone because it's not affected by stack pushes.
Bug 1773434 Comment 0 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
After bug 1770366 we can use `[rbp+N]` instead of `[rsp+N]` to access arguments and stack slots. (Wasm is already doing this for arguments but not stack slots.) On x86/x64, this saves one byte per instruction and has [other benefits](https://stackoverflow.com/a/54348505). C/C++ compilers also prefer the frame pointer over the stack pointer if they're not omitting frame pointers. Using the frame pointer is also less error-prone because it's not affected by stack pushes.