Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations

rockwell@nova.umd.edu (Raul Deluth Miller)
Mon, 14 Nov 1994 16:45:33 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[15 earlier articles]
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations kendall@pot.East.Sun.COM (1994-11-05)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations praetorius@figs.enet.dec.com (1994-11-09)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations pjensen@csi.compuserve.com (1994-11-11)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations glew@ichips.intel.com (1994-11-13)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations glew@ichips.intel.com (1994-11-13)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations monnier@di.epfl.ch (1994-11-14)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations rockwell@nova.umd.edu (1994-11-14)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations dsiebert@icaen.uiowa.edu (1994-11-14)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations ok@cs.rmit.oz.au (1994-11-21)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations thorinn@diku.dk (1994-11-21)
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations praetorius@figs.enet.dec.com (1994-11-23)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.compilers
From: rockwell@nova.umd.edu (Raul Deluth Miller)
In-Reply-To: glew@ichips.intel.com's message of Sun, 13 Nov 1994 02:10:36 GMT
Keywords: design, optimize
Organization: University of Maryland University College
References: 94-10-108 94-11-087
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 16:45:33 GMT

Andy Glew:
. From this, I conclude that there are valid reasons to not
. arbitrarily reorder BUT ALL OF THESE REASONS ARE BROKEN OR
. NONPORTABLE C PROGRAMS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! (except for class a,
. passing between separately compiled modules)


Of course, BROKEN is not the same thing as NONPORTABLE -- which is
but one of the many reasons for compiler invocation options.


--
Raul D. Miller
<rockwell@nova.umd.edu>
--

Post a followup to this message

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