This is the mail archive of the 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]


At Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:37:36 +0000 (UTC), Martin wrote:
> I was just pondering why [processor and compiler co-design]
> doesn't happen more often.

A lot of architectures these days are fairly well standardized.

If you're implementing one of them, often you already *have* compilers
and assemblers that generate functional if not optimized code.
(Likewise with operating systems: "it already runs on this other part
that uses this architecture, how hard could it be...")

Once you're there, you're no longer *forced* to get tools (and OS)
people involved up front.

If you're not *forced* to do so, then...  8-)

I don't think there's as much understanding as there should be in the
processor-design community of the value of having tools & OS people
involved up front.

(To my mind, that explains the issue satisfactorily, for
standard-architecture implementations.  For custom ones, well, i don't
really have a clue.)

Chris Demetriou                                            Broadcom Corporation
                Principal Design Engineer, Broadband Processors
  Any opinions expressed in this message are mine, not necessarily Broadcom's.

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