Re: backend question

"Fermin Reig" <reig@tenerife.ics.uci.edu>
24 Nov 2002 01:18:04 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: backend question hannah@schlund.de (Hannah Schroeter) (2002-11-13)
Re: backend question fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-11-13)
Re: backend question joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-11-13)
Re: backend question thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-17)
Re: backend question joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-11-20)
Re: backend question chase@world.std.com (David Chase) (2002-11-20)
Re: backend question reig@tenerife.ics.uci.edu (Fermin Reig) (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question felixundduni@freenet.de (felix) (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question whopkins@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) (2002-11-24)
Re: backend question joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-11-24)
[7 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Fermin Reig" <reig@tenerife.ics.uci.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 24 Nov 2002 01:18:04 -0500
Organization: University of California, Irvine
References: 02-11-063 02-11-078 02-11-099 02-11-112
Keywords: C, practice, GC
Posted-Date: 24 Nov 2002 01:18:04 EST

"David Chase" <chase@world.std.com> writes:


> On 17 Nov 2002 23:20:16 -0500, thp@cs.ucr.edu wrote:
> > Joachim Durchholz <joachim_d@gmx.de> wrote:
> > + Which doesn't mean it's particularly suitable... C gets you started
> > + quickly, but for an intermediate format, it abstracts away the wrong
> > + things in some places. This begins to bite if you're doing
> > + concurrency, exceptions, fancy integer arithmetic, tail-call
> > + elimination, or state machines.
>
> > Standard C lacks an indirect jump (though one can be kludged a switch
> > statement). Anything that can be done in say MIPS assembly language
> > can be done in gcc, which has an indirect goto. Where necessary, one
> > can generates comments that preserve the memory of what got abstracted
> > away.
>
> Standard C doesn't give you enough control to write a precise garbage
> collector (one that can see all the pointers, and exactly all the
> pointers),


However, see Fergus Henderson's recent paper:


Accurate Garbage Collection in an Uncooperative Environment
Proceedings of the 2002 International Symposium on Memory Management,
Berlin, Germany, June 2002, pages 150-156.


Available at www.cs.mu.oz.au/research/mercury/information/papers.html


Fermín Reig



Post a followup to this message

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