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]

Why are GCC Internals not Specification Driven ?


Hi,

    For regular users of gcc who want to delve into the insides(guts)
    of the compiler, it is disappointing that there exist no complete
    specification of internals in a phase order manner.

    Precisely, stuffs like GENERIC, GIMPLE, RTL, gas(inline assembly),
    GCC extensions internals, ... and gnu's own debugging tied to gcc
    (if such exist nowadays), ... are not documented in a specification
    driven way.

     Has gcc become proprietory/commercial ?

     Or has it become illegal to publish specification models
     of gcc internals ? Does this make the product sell less ?

     Curious as an old gcc afficianado. :-|

     p.s. Higher then GENERIC also sounds desirable.

Sincerely,
Seima Rao.


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