Groups > comp.compilers > #2039

Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format

Path	csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	"Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format
Date	Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:05:49 -0400 (EDT)
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines	24
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<18-04-011@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<0d4dc7f8-1819-43e5-8082-6ff7aee5f41b@googlegroups.com> <p9l0cs$p2r$1@gioia.aioe.org> <p9l9bs$am7$1@dont-email.me> <p9ldok$1h9j$1@gioia.aioe.org> <p9li4d$4mn$1@dont-email.me> <p9lvbt$fn0$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2018Mar31.160556@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <p9o96c$1r72$1@gioia.aioe.org> <p9ohgc$vdl$1@dont-email.me> <2018Mar31.195714@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <p9osbc$6mv$1@dont-email.me> <2018Apr1.144759@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <p9u1fk$hsb$1@dont-email.me> <229d6323-b9fa-4845-8039-03799d76c847@googlegroups.com> <p9viff$qnj$1@dont-email.me> <cbebbb95-e32d-4e97-8b2f-829c38ebb66e@googlegroups.com> <pafisn$1n9t$1@gioia.aioe.org> <pafjtv$ocr$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Info	gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="50726"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords	standards
Posted-Date	10 Apr 2018 11:05:49 EDT
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Content-Language	en-US
Xref	csiph.com comp.compilers:2039

Show key headers only | View raw

 [[ this string is copied from comp.arch because your moderation found it interesting ]]

On 2018-04-09 7:48 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 09/04/18 13:30, Walter Banks wrote:

>>
>> GCC tools are for the most part using old compiler technology.
>> Some of is decades old.
>
> You are fond of saying that, but I don't remember hearing any
> details or examples.
>

- Strategy passes to determine how an applications should be compiled
this time.

- Direct compiling to machine code and not using intermediate assembler
to get away from the two copy problem with code generation ISA restrictions.

- Whole application building. Why is linking still being done when its
purpose was to get around computer limitations?

w..

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format "Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2018-04-10 11:05 -0400
  Re: Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-04-12 12:15 +0100

csiph-web