Re: Machine language and assembler translators?

A Pietu Pohjalainen <pohjalai@cc.helsinki.fi>
28 Jul 2005 02:33:34 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[9 earlier articles]
Re:Machine language and assembler translators? Robert.Thorpe@antenova.com (Robert Thorpe) (2005-07-22)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? peter.jinks@manchester.ac.uk (Pete Jinks) (2005-07-22)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2005-07-26)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? Martin.Ward@durham.ac.uk (Martin Ward) (2005-07-26)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? haberg@math.su.se (2005-07-28)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? jjk@acm.org (Jens Kilian) (2005-07-28)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? pohjalai@cc.helsinki.fi (A Pietu Pohjalainen) (2005-07-28)
Re: Machine language and assembler translators? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2005-07-28)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: A Pietu Pohjalainen <pohjalai@cc.helsinki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 28 Jul 2005 02:33:34 -0400
Organization: University of Helsinki
References: 05-06-103 05-06-112 05-07-089 05-07-094
Keywords: translator
Posted-Date: 28 Jul 2005 02:33:10 EDT

glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> Now, I wonder what happens when you run 68K mac code on an x86 emulating
> PowerPC. Does it emulate the 68K emulator?


> Hmm, that will be interesting to see...


The current knowledge is that the Classic environment will be
scrapped on Intel macs. Too bad - it wouldn't be that big effort (as far
as I understand..) to convert it to run straight on x86. But then again,
maybe the benefits are even lower.


br,
Pietu

Post a followup to this message

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