Re: Green Compiler ?

"Charles Richmond" <>
Fri, 4 Jan 2013 08:59:56 -0600

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[17 earlier articles]
Re: Green Compiler ? (George Neuner) (2012-12-31)
Re: Green Compiler ? (Jonathan Thornburg) (2013-01-02)
Re: Green Compiler ? (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2013-01-02)
Re: Green Compiler ? (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2013-01-02)
Re: Green Compiler ? (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2013-01-02)
Re: Green Compiler ? (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2013-01-02)
Re: Green Compiler ? (Charles Richmond) (2013-01-04)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Charles Richmond" <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 08:59:56 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: 12-12-010 12-12-012 12-12-022 12-12-028 12-12-034 12-12-037 13-01-002 13-01-005 13-01-009
Keywords: architecture, performance, history
Posted-Date: 04 Jan 2013 11:42:36 EST

"glen herrmannsfeldt" <> wrote in message
> Hans-Peter Diettrich <> wrote:
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>> For that reason some (Texas Instruments?) processors implemented a
>> register stack, decades ago, with its stack pointer adjusted according
>> to the number of registers used in a subroutine. This stack could be
>> moved into the CPU nowadays, eliminating the need for saving registers
>> in external memory.
> If I remember the TMS9900, the registers were in memory, so that
> pointer just changed where in memory they were.

The TMS9900 did allocate the register "file" in memory, with a pointer
in the CPU to indicate the position of the register file. Some
versions of the chip had some on-board RAM that could be used for
register allocation. This RAM was faster to access and would speed
along execution.


numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

Post a followup to this message

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