This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Remaining host configuration fragments
- From: Lars Brinkhoff <lars dot spam at nocrew dot org>
- To: pkoning at equallogic dot com
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 23 Jan 2002 08:49:07 +0100
- Subject: Re: Remaining host configuration fragments
- Organization: nocrew
- References: <10201221907.AA25330@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
email@example.com (Richard Kenner) writes:
> I asked in three places whether anyone was using GCC to compile code
> for the PDP-11: the PDP Unix Preservation Society mailing list (where
> the 2.11BSD maintainer lurks), the classiccmp mailing list, and the
> alt.sys.pdp11 newsgroup. In all cases, there were no voices raised in
> defense of the PDP-11 back end in GCC.
> Which suggests that the people using it are not in those forums.
Right, I was just trying to collect some anecdotal evidence.
Paul Koning <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Perhaps that's because the backend in its current state doesn't
> actually work. I've been tinkering with it (inspired by the new pdp11
> GAS support). It's getting closer.
Great! Here's some sort of user feedback, dunno if it's useful to you:
Harti Brandt <email@example.com> writes:
> Last time I tried it, it was incredibly broken (around
> gcc-2.6.X). One of the big problems was, that gcc had hard coded
> optimisations which assume, that the address space is large. If you,
> for example, divide an integer by 10, it will generate you a
> screenful of assembler code, which is bad in almost any case on a
> PDP11. Dividing unsigned longs was even worse and you couldn't tell
> gcc that it should call a library function for this. I don't know,
> whether this has changed in newer gcc's.
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ programming