Related articles |
---|
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler peter@ficc.ferranti.com (1991-08-12) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler svensson@imec.imec.be (1991-08-13) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (1991-08-13) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler pardo@cs.washington.edu (1991-08-13) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler howard@research.att.com (1991-08-14) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler kurt@tc.fluke.COM (1991-08-15) |
giving away the store by Factors of Two mo@bellcore.com (1991-08-16) |
Re: Thompson's Plan 9 C compiler oz@ursa.ccs.yorku.ca (1991-08-16) |
[1 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | svensson@imec.imec.be (Lars Svensson) |
In-Reply-To: | peter@ficc.ferranti.com's message of 12 Aug 91 16:39:05 GMT |
Keywords: | C, design |
Organization: | IMEC vzw, Leuven, Belgium |
References: | 91-08-048 |
Date: | 13 Aug 91 07:50:04 GMT |
[From comp.arch -John]
In article <GW5DMC@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
The Thompson compiler is extremely hardware-independent and generates
good 68020, MIPS, and Crisp code.
Note that the code generator proper is hand-written for each of these
architectures. To quote the paper: "There is a considerable amount of
talk in literature about automating this part of the compiler with a
hardware description. Since this code generator is so small (less than
500 lines of C) and easy, it hardly seems worth the effort." I guess
this is less than a gcc hardware description anyway.
It also implements full ANSI standard C, not a subset.
Not correct. To quote the paper again: "The compiler implements ANSI C
with some restrictions and extensions." "Several of the poorer
features were left out."
This is just nit-picking. I also really liked the paper.
J
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.