Re: tree-ssa status

[Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>]

Paul Brook wrote:

> On Thursday 27 February 2003 8:57 pm, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> > Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl> writes:
> >
> > > But it seems that we'll be stuck with at least one front end that will
> > > probably never be able to do function-at-a-time compilation (g77).
> >
> > Isn't g95 targeted for the 3.5 time frame as well?  If so, we ought to
> > be able to scrap g77 entirely.

> While g95 may be nominally targeted for this timeframe, I very much doubt it 
> will be considered an acceptable replacement for g77 until some time 
> afterwards. A working g95 and a g95 which is as good as (or better than) 
> g77 for fortran 77 code are two totally different things.

For the benefit of understanding this issue by those not intimately 
involved in Fortran business:  Most closed-source Fortran compilers 
consisted as two separate executables for about a decade before the 
Fortran 90/95 compiler was "good enough" at the Fortran 77 stuff to be 
the only offering.

We hope to work faster than that, but don't hold your breath.

--
Toon Moene - mailto:toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc-g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)