|Compilers for supercomputing or the opposite ? firstname.lastname@example.org (2007-10-05)|
|Re: Compilers for supercomputing or the opposite ? DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2007-10-06)|
|Re: Compilers for supercomputing or the opposite ? email@example.com (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2007-10-06)|
|From:||Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com>|
|Date:||Sat, 06 Oct 2007 01:19:42 +0200|
|Posted-Date:||06 Oct 2007 14:44:02 EDT|
> Although compiler code for supercomputing is commonplace,
> supercomputing FOR compilers is coming.
> For an EDA (Electronic Design Automation) project, we are facing
> symbol tables over 500 million entries.
IMO you should consider to break down your symbol tables into more handy
pieces, using scopes or whatsoever, or to use binary symbols instead of
named symbols, if the symbol tables are for automatic processing only.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.