I agree with Vladimir wholeheartedly. After working on OpenIMPACT for
years, I reached the conclusion that the ONLY way to make a real difference
for Linux Itanium users is to help improve the mainstream GCC compiler.
That is why my team (esp. Bob Kidd) is actively helping with a strong
superblock
path in GCC. As you know, the superblock techniques originated in IMPACT
more than 12 years ago.
We will be glad to work with the community to improve other aspects of the the
GCC (interprocedural pointer analysis, array dependence, memory
dataflow, etc.)
based on our experience with IMPACT in the future. I personally see OpenIMPACT
as proving ground for techniques and GCC as the real delivery vehicle for the
software base.
Regards,
wen-mei
At 08:49 AM 9/14/2005, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 10:53, Robert Dewar wrote:
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
(If so, I'm wondering what it's going to buy the interested parties,
because I have a hard time seeing one of the large GNU/Linux distributors
switching to a compiler different from FSF GCC for Itanium.)
Surely this depends on relative performance ...
My guess is that there are more important things than performance,
such as stability, community support, maintenance burden, etc.
I would add single compiler for other linux (and non-linux) ports,
more compact code for Itanium (sometimes 2 times more compact), many
additional features (last ones are mudflap and stack protector). If
it was perfomance only, people would have switched to Intel, ORC or
Openimpact compilers long ago. But according Gelato poll, most of
Itanium users (like 70%) prefer to use gcc than other compilers.
_______________________________________________
Gelato-gcc mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/gelato-gcc
