Re: WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end

Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
8 Dec 2005 22:08:25 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end lux@diesel-research.com (Kim Lux) (2005-12-08)
Re: WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end ian@airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor) (2005-12-08)
Re: WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end nkavv@skiathos.physics.auth.gr (Uncle Noah) (2005-12-08)
Re: WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2005-12-11)
Re: WANTED: One good retargettable compiler back end nr@eecs.harvard.edu (2005-12-29)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 Dec 2005 22:08:25 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 05-12-016
Keywords: C, code
Posted-Date: 08 Dec 2005 22:08:25 EST

Kim Lux <lux@diesel-research.com> writes:


> We looked at gcc, but think it is much better suited to general
> purpose processors rather than 8/16 bit processors with limited
> registers, Harvard memory maps, etc.


I don't disagree with that. I just want to note that I and others
have successfully ported gcc to support 8 and 16 bit processors with
limited registers, Harvard memory maps, even 16-bit memory access
(e.g., no 8-bit memory access). That is, it can be done.


Actually the biggest difficulty I've seen is that the tests in the
testsuite tend to assume large memory space, 8-bit memory access,
32-bit ints, etc., so you wind up having to look at the tests
individually to see which ones will never work on your processor, and
which ones indicate actual problems.


Ian


Post a followup to this message

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