Re: GCC parser performacne, What is the future of Compiler technology?

"Paolo Bonzini" <bonzini@gnu.org>
8 Aug 2006 23:58:58 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
What is the future of Compiler ? blertadn@yahoo.com (blerta bishaj) (2006-06-12)
Re: What is the future of Compiler technology? tommy.thorn@gmail.com (Tommy Thorn) (2006-06-19)
Re: What is the future of Compiler technology? oliver@zeigermann.de (Oliver Zeigermann) (2006-07-16)
Re: What is the future of Compiler technology? Juergen.Kahrs@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2006-07-16)
Re: What is the future of Compiler technology? pocmatos@gmail.com (Paulo Matos) (2006-07-31)
Re: What is the future of Compiler technology? gdr@integrable-solutions.net (Gabriel Dos Reis) (2006-07-31)
Re: GCC parser performacne, What is the future of Compiler technology? bonzini@gnu.org (Paolo Bonzini) (2006-08-08)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Paolo Bonzini" <bonzini@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 Aug 2006 23:58:58 -0400
Organization: http://groups.google.com
References: 06-06-04406-06-055 06-07-023 06-07-031 06-07-109 06-07-114
Keywords: GCC, C++, parse, performance
Posted-Date: 08 Aug 2006 23:58:58 EDT

> From experience, the performance of the GCC/g++ *parser* had worried
> and continue to worry users and corporate that base their system
> compilers on it.
>
> [Really? The parser, not the lexer? -John]


Besides all the other reasons exposed further down in the thread, it is
relevant that the GCC parser for C++ does backtracking, and the
backtracking is often driven by some initial semantic processing; the
lexer however only looks at each character once because the file (after
preprocessing) is kept in memory in tokenized format.


Paolo



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.