This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [G95] Re: [tree-ssa] Integrating g95
- From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: "Michael S.Zick" <mszick at goquest dot com>, law at redhat dot com,"gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:59:06 +0100
- Subject: Re: [G95] Re: [tree-ssa] Integrating g95
- References: <03060113384400.00995@wolf686> <1E12CFF7-9462-11D7-9201-000A95A34564@dberlin.org>
Daniel Berlin wrote:-
>
> On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 02:38 PM, Michael S. Zick wrote:
>
> >On Saturday 31 May 2003 09:08 pm, law@redhat.com wrote:
> >>
> >>[ I suspect asking the g95 folks to rewrite their code to avoid GMP
> >> probably isn't going to be well received :-) ]
> >>
> >>jeff
> >Yea - right after C is rewritten not to depend on libc.
> >I hereby grant my trophy for unpopular suggestions to jeff.
>
> Wasn't there discussion a while back about wanting to use GMP (or a
> subset) for doing host math anyway?
> But it wasn't done because we didn't want to add another library
> requirement?
> If G95 is going to need it, maybe we should just use it and be done
> with it?
> Or am i remembering all this wrong?
We've wanted to do something better than the double-integer kludges
for a while, but not to penalize the normal cases where single or
double-integer math is sufficient, so yes.
But it's a long, hard job and no-one's stepped up to the plate.
Neil.