pentium?

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < u9zpouvri1.fsf@neal.ctd.comsat.com >you write:
  > Any plans to incorporate pentium optimizations into egcs?
Are you referring to the pgcc stuff?

Yes, but it's going to take time -- most of the stuff intel wrote
that became pgcc was poorly written, sometimes broken for the x86
and often wrong for other machines.

Much/most of it will need to be rewritten.

I'm casually looking at some of the loop stuff in my copious
spare time :-)  Some of their loop changes are _much_ more
complicated than they need to be, others have been made either
mostly or completely obsolete by changes already in gcc.  Still
others will have to be rewritten.

We also have a pretty good idea how to replace all that ugly riscify
code, but nobody's stepped up to do the work.  If anyone is interested,
they can contact me and I'll describe a cleaner solution which re-uses
gcc's instruction splitting code.

A lot of their reload improvements are becomming obsolete as
reload_cse gets better.  Once we pick up the latest reload_cse stuff
from gcc2 I think the only serious thing we'll be missing is hoisting
of spills out of loops -- and that may be made obsolete by the
live range splitting code Cygnus is working on.

So, the summary is I think we're slowly addressing the kinds of
things pgcc was trying to optimize, but potentially in different
ways -- hopefully in ways that will benefit more ports than just
the pentium.

Jeff