Register allocation

avizit@gmail.com (Abhijit Ray)
15 Jul 2004 16:34:13 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Register allocation sumesh_uk@hotmail.com (2003-07-04)
Re: Register allocation touati@prism.uvsq.fr (TOUATI Sid) (2003-07-15)
Register allocation robert.thorpe@antenova.com (Rob Thorpe) (2003-07-21)
Re: Register allocation sumesh_uk@hotmail.com (2003-07-21)
Re: Register allocation lindahl@pbm.com (2003-07-21)
Re: Register allocation dany42NOSPAM@free.fr (Dan) (2003-07-21)
Re: Register allocation sumesh_uk@hotmail.com (2003-07-31)
Register allocation avizit@gmail.com (2004-07-15)
Re: Register allocation gopi@sankhya.com (2004-07-28)
Re: Register allocation rajaram@acmet.com (Rajaram) (2004-08-04)
Re: Register allocation kamalp@acm.org (2004-08-05)
Re: Register allocation kym@sdf.lonestar.org (russell kym horsell) (2004-08-09)
Re: Register allocation kamalp@acm.org (2004-08-09)
Re: Register allocation gopi@sankhya.com (2004-08-10)
[21 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: avizit@gmail.com (Abhijit Ray)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 15 Jul 2004 16:34:13 -0400
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Keywords: registers, optimize, question
Posted-Date: 15 Jul 2004 16:34:13 EDT

Are there any published records of how much improvement ( both in code
size and run time ) "register allocation" provides?


I am trying to get the performance estimates of a C program. But at
the moment I am ignoring the act that the number of registers are
limited. I am assuming that the processor has infinite registers. What
I would like to know is what range of error I might run into under
such assumption.


If there are published reports all the better.


Thanks,
Abhijit.

Post a followup to this message

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