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: Remaining host configuration fragments


kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (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 <pkoning@equallogic.com> 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 <hbb@fokus.gmd.de> 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.
  >               brandt@fokus.fhg.de

-- 
Lars Brinkhoff          http://lars.nocrew.org/     Linux, GCC, PDP-10
Brinkhoff Consulting    http://www.brinkhoff.se/    programming


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