Re: GCC is 25 years old today

Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com>
Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:03:01 +0200

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: GCC is 25 years old today mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-03-26)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today compilers@is-not-my.name (2012-03-27)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-03-28)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-03-28)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today rui.maciel@gmail.com (Rui Maciel) (2012-03-28)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB) (2012-03-28)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2012-03-29)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today compilers@is-not-my.name (2012-03-29)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today Pidgeot18@verizon.net (Joshua Cranmer) (2012-03-29)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB) (2012-03-29)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2012-03-30)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-03-30)
Re: GCC is 25 years old today cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB) (2012-03-30)
[6 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:03:01 +0200
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 12-03-051 12-03-053 12-03-062
Keywords: GCC, history
Posted-Date: 30 Mar 2012 02:34:01 EDT

Rui Maciel schrieb:


> But GCC isn't the only free compiler out there, and yet no other
> compiler, paid or free, managed to attain the same level of
> popularity. Couldn't it be possible that GCC's success is owed to
> some determining factor other than price?


In former times it was common practice to use one compiler for
development, and another one for production. The development compiler
has to integrate nicely into the development system, with short
turn-around times, and has to provide the best diagnostics possible.
The production compiler instead has to provide the best optimization,
while diagnostics and turn-around times are quite unimportant.




> [I think it's fair to say that GCC was the first free compiler that
> generated code competitive with commercial compilers. -John]


Obviously it's more economic to maintain multiple code generators in a
common compiler framework, instead of writing and maintaining an
dedicated compiler for every target, as most isolated commercial or
hobby compiler writers did.


My experience with "highly optimizing" compilers, in detail MSC, sums
up in "the new version ejects less NOPs than the preceding one". This
may have changed nowadays, though...


DoDi


Post a followup to this message

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