This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC for SPARC Systems
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- To: Alexey Starovoytov <alexey dot starovoytov at sun dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Rainer Orth <ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:46:29 +0100
- Subject: Re: GCC for SPARC Systems
- References: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0603092302520.11634-100000@boojum>
> When you're a company like Intel with a relatively small gap between gcc
> on x86 and icl, it's worth improving the gcc backend, but on Sparc
> the gap is much wider, so the effort to bridge it may not be justified
> from a resource point of view.
Eh, SPARC is not IA-64 so improving the SPARC back-end should not be more
resource-consuming than designing and maintaining a hybrid compiler. If I'm
not mistaken, the gap is wide for FP code essentially but Sun doesn't seem
to care much about FP anymore if I read the Niagara specs correctly.
> Personally I wouldn't mind working towards improving gcc sparc backend.
> Actually we are fixing gcc own bugs and contribute them back.
To be clear, not bugs in the SPARC back-end.
May I also suggest to find a different name for the product? Presumably it
doesn't run on Linux or FreeBSD so "GCC for SPARC Systems" is a bit
misleading, given that FSF GCC for SPARC does run on the aforementioned
operating systems in addition to Solaris. Something like "Sun GCC for
SPARC/Solaris Systems" although I'm not sure if using "GCC" is not already