Daniel Berlin wrote: > >As some few people might already know, the GGCC (globalgcc) project is > >just starting (partly funded within the ITEA framework by french, > >spanish, swedish public money) - its kick off meeting is next week in > >Paris. > > > >GGCC aims to provide a (GPL opensource) extension to GCC for program > >wide static analysis (& optimisations) and coding rules > >validation. But this mail is not a formal announcement of it... > > > >I am also extremely interested in the LTO framework, in particular > >their persistence of GIMPLE trees. Could LTO people explain (if > >possible) if their framework is extensible (to some new Gimple nodes) > >and usable in some other setting (for example, storing program wide > >static analysis partial results, perhaps in a "project" related > >database or file). > > This is one of the goals of LTO. > > To steer this thread onto another topic, if you ever plan on getting > your "globalgcc" changes back into gcc proper, I highly suggest you do > your design and implementation discussions on gcc's mailing lists, and > coordinate with GCC people who work in those areas. GCC itself is > gearing up to start doing program wide analysis and optimization, and > I guarantee you that if you guys go off and do it on your own in > seclusion you will > 1. duplicate work > 2. make it incredibly hard to get your work back into gcc. > > Of course, if getting work into gcc is not a goal of globalgcc, than > by all means, ...
The aim of globalgcc is to contribute all the new code to GCC. I think I'm also supposed to work on this project, as Albert Cohen is one of those who wrote a part of the proposal. However I still have not received any news on this project, except for the proposal that I reviewed long time ago. Sebastian
