Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | blume@zayin.cs.princeton.edu (Matthias Blume) |
Keywords: | parallel, optimize |
Organization: | Princeton University |
References: | 95-09-030 95-10-054 95-10-092 |
Date: | Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:42:16 GMT |
> Martin.Jourdan@inria.fr (Martin Jourdan) writes:
A side benefit is that the C code produced by such compilers is generally
free from hard-to-analyze features (e.g. aliases) that hinders low-level
optimizations,
I wouldn't call this a benefit -- rather the opposite. It is true that
C code generated from high-level programs doesn't have some undesirable
properties, but the C compiler doesn't know that. Only expensive analysis,
which often is too pessimistic and conservative to even discover the truth
(because it also has to deal with `real' C programs), prevents many useful
optimizations from taking place.
so that, altogether, the executable you obtain from a
Scheme or ML source is quite competitive with the one you get from
hand-written C code (and of course much easier to write).
What is `quite competetive'? Only twice as slow? Five times? Ten times?
--
-Matthias
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.