This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC for SPARC Systems
- From: Alexey Starovoytov <alexey dot starovoytov at sun dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:10:07 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: GCC for SPARC Systems
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Friday 03 March 2006 02:46, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
> > We are pleased to announce the availability of GCC for SPARC (R) Systems
> > (GCCfss) at http://cooltools.sunsource.net/gcc/
> Instead of pleased, I'd be ashamed for announcing this. To me
Being in hardware org I'm ashamed that SPARC cpus are not performing
well with GCC, so I'm pleased that we can do something about it with gcc4ss.
> it feels like you're announcing with pride how you ripped off gcc.
We are proud to make SPARC cpus faster.
The users care about performance and reliability of their apps.
I don't think it's matter to them how compiler is called or that it's
rip off of something else.
> Inlining happens _before_ all (tree-level and other) optimizations.
> I have to assume you also looked at GCC close enough to notice.
I apologize. Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that.
gcc does inline on tree-level. Fixed that.
> It is unfortunate, but I guess typical, that Sun has not learned
> from the mistakes made by others in the past, for example from how
> SGI tried and failed to pull off the same trick with Pro64.
I wasn't making any legal/license decisions.
I'm aware of open64, but here is way different imho.
What do you think is wrong from GPL point of view?