unfortunately, integration of aspex's proprietary tool-chain - written in modula-2 - is extremely unlikely to ever be integrated into gcc.
Right. But the ideas could be. The ideas in some respects are more important than the code.
secondly, the code it generates is c-code - not any kind of assembler.
Not a problem, the internal tree structure in the compiler, where one would target such code generation is not any kinda of assembler either. Looks more like, uhm, C. :-)
that c-code places instructions onto a memory-mapped FIFO queue.
As can the tree code.
the PCI card containing the ASP processors can go into _any_ standard hardware with _any_ standard processor.
While gcc doesn't usually do this, I don't see a compelling reason why it cannot, though, it would be a bit hard to do the first one.
additionally, full and transparent integration (i.e. automatic
recognition of arrays of ints and turning them into hardware-accelerated
ASP code) is a YET MORE complex task.
And yet, gcc already does this. This is the power of using gcc, you don't have to code this to get it, you get it for free.
regenerating template-instantiated code-fragments, "outsourcing" them
to aspex's toolchain and re-running context-sensitive gcc parsing on them
is the most "sane" from-here-to-there way that i can think of doing
things.
Ok. Certainly you can do this, gcc is free, and is meant to allow people the freedom to do this, I just doubt that we'd be interested at all in the work, either helping you code, giving help, advice and directions or even incorporating it. Put another way, that path is lonely.
it also represents an alternate "way out" that doesn't force you to go the whole hog of [MasPar?
We seem already committed to doing that. So, it doesn't save anything.
i presume by OpenMP you mean maspar] MP's "plural" syntax.
See google("OpenMP") for what I mean by OpenMP.
you are NEVER - not if you are in your right mind - going to get THAT integrated into gcc. EVER.
Ok, yes, I agree. For example, one could have a group of 4 Xilinx chips on a daughter card, and it would be nice to expose those resources to the compiler, and have it do something intelligent with it, this isn't going to happen. In the end, it would require someone setting up a range of allowable things one can have, and then to generate `code' for that.
But, one can come up with sufficiently small subsets of that, that are useful, and make that work vend that to customers, collect money for it, and then plow that back into the process and do yet more with it. Without a customer, well, let's just say, grad students would be the next best thing, who else would do a months worth of work for $100.
... all that having been said, i would _love_ to see the MP "plural" syntax integrated back into gcc.
See below... grab gcc, apply the patches...
i _did_ spend a significant amount of effort trying to track down the original MP-modified tarball - several months, in fact.
You can grab a current version on the gcc mailing list. See a port by rth in the past week or so. OpenMP in the subject line, as I recall.
