This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: More NEWS on GCC?

From: Nicholas Nethercote <njn at cs dot utexas dot edu>
To: Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael dot espindola at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Timothy Miller <theosib at gmail dot com>, gcc at gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 08:21:33 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: More NEWS on GCC?
References: <9871ee5f050829214932910174@mail.gmail.com><200508300703.40750.rafael.espindola@gmail.com>

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:

One problem is that compiler technology generally requires more background
then OS:
1) the new O(1) scheduler
2) the new PCI interface
or
1) the new SSA based intermediate representation
2) the new DFA based pipeline hazard recognizer

I don't think the compiler technology is much more complicated to describe than the OS technology. All four of those concepts would require at least a little background explanation to non-OS and non-compiler people.

Timothy has a good point. GCC is arguably more important than the Linux kernel, yet it gets very little press and recognition. Note also that everybody loves Linux (more or less) but people mostly bitch about GCC if they think about it at all. Perhaps these facts are connected?

Nick

Follow-Ups:
- Re: More NEWS on GCC?
  - From: Timothy Miller

References:
- More NEWS on GCC?
  - From: Timothy Miller
- Re: More NEWS on GCC?
  - From: Rafael Ávila de Espíndola

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]