|Is register stack compilers' friend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-10-31)|
|Re: Is register stack compilers' friend? email@example.com (1995-11-04)|
|Re: Is register stack compilers' friend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-11-05)|
|Re: Is register stack compilers' friend? email@example.com (1995-11-06)|
|Is register stack compilers' friend? firstname.lastname@example.org (Dave Lloyd) (1995-11-06)|
|Re: Is register stack compilers' friend? email@example.com (1995-11-09)|
|Re: Is register stack compilers' friend? firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-11-13)|
|From:||email@example.com (Jeremy Fitzhardinge)|
|Organization:||Softway Pty Limited|
|Date:||Mon, 13 Nov 1995 05:53:00 GMT|
firstname.lastname@example.org (Henry Baker) writes:
>Phil Koopman, who was at CMU and now at United Technologies, did some
>studies on high performance implementations of C on a stack machine.
>Unfortunately, I don't recall the exact reference.
author ="Koopman, Philip",
title ="A Preliminary Exploration of Optimized Stack Code Generation",
journal ="Journal of Forth Applications and Research",
keywords ="intra-block stack scheduling"
I don't know if he ever published anything beyond the "Preliminary
Exploration". His results were quite interesting: given a reasonable
set of native stack operations, you could systematically eliminate a
lot of register variables in favor of stack use within basic blocks.
He said he didn't find as satisfactory solution for global register
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.