On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Eh, SPARC is not IA-64 so improving the SPARC back-end should not be more > resource-consuming than designing and maintaining a hybrid compiler. If I'm
gcc4ss wasn't a big effort. gimple form made it easy for us. > not mistaken, the gap is wide for FP code essentially but Sun doesn't seem > to care much about FP anymore if I read the Niagara specs correctly. You're right about Niagara's FP, but it's just one line of products. > May I also suggest to find a different name for the product? Presumably it > doesn't run on Linux or FreeBSD so "GCC for SPARC Systems" is a bit > misleading, given that FSF GCC for SPARC does run on the aforementioned > operating systems in addition to Solaris. Something like "Sun GCC for > SPARC/Solaris Systems" although I'm not sure if using "GCC" is not already > misleading. Glad you mentioned it. Really. I don't like that name either. Unfortunatelly that what we were told to use. May be we'll try to change it. Also your 'presumtion' is correct for the present only. Alexey. > > -- > Eric Botcazou >
