|lcc intel backend? email@example.com (1993-10-07)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-10-11)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? email@example.com (1993-10-12)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-10-12)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? email@example.com (1993-10-15)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-10-18)|
|Re: lcc intel backend? email@example.com (1993-10-19)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (David O'Brien)|
|Keywords:||GCC, performance, C|
|Organization:||George Washington University|
|Date:||Fri, 15 Oct 1993 01:17:23 GMT|
Gavin Thomas Nicol (email@example.com) wrote:
: I should note that from the lcc papers I've read, it seems like it is much
: faster, and much smaller than gcc, but code generation is not as good. ...
I am assuming the papers you are refering to are the 3 papers included
with the anonymous ftp distribution. If I remember correctly they
compaired lcc to gcc v1.x. Does anyone have any idea how the current
version of lcc compaires with Gcc version 2.4.5?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.