Groups > comp.compilers > #2041

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	"Nick Maclaren" <nmm@wheeler.UUCP>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format
Date	9 Apr 2018 16:45:12 -0000
Organization	Old Fogies Society
Lines	38
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<18-04-013@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<0d4dc7f8-1819-43e5-8082-6ff7aee5f41b@googlegroups.com> <pafisn$1n9t$1@gioia.aioe.org> <pafjtv$ocr$1@dont-email.me> <pag2qg$lq4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Reply-To	nmm1@cam.ac.uk
Injection-Info	gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="51297"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords	standards
Posted-Date	10 Apr 2018 11:06:25 EDT
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Originator	nmm@wheeler.UUCP (Nick Maclaren)
Xref	csiph.com comp.compilers:2041

Show key headers only | View raw

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

In article <pag2qg$lq4$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
Walter Banks  <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote:
>On 2018-04-09 7:48 AM, David Brown 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.

Yes.  Yuck.  It's a nightmare for debugging, and makes it damn-near
impossible to tune code that is going to be run by someone else.

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

Well, er, yes, in theory.  But suitable intermediate non-text languages
(assembler is, I agree, outdated) are a vast simplification of compilers
that are designed for multiple source languages and multiple target
machines.  gcc is one such.

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

No, it wasn't.  That was ONE purpose.  A far more important one was to
allow and support separate compilation, as needed when an application
uses a library built by someone else.  And how many large and serious
programs DON'T do that?

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Language standards vs. implementation, was Re: A right alternative to IEEE-754's format "Nick Maclaren" <nmm@wheeler.UUCP> - 2018-04-09 16:45 +0000

csiph-web