Re: backend question

"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

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