tree-ssa status
Toon Moene
toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl
Fri Feb 28 21:15:00 GMT 2003
Paul Brook wrote:
> On Thursday 27 February 2003 8:57 pm, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
>>Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl> writes:
>>
>>>But it seems that we'll be stuck with at least one front end that will
>>>probably never be able to do function-at-a-time compilation (g77).
>>
>>Isn't g95 targeted for the 3.5 time frame as well? If so, we ought to
>>be able to scrap g77 entirely.
> While g95 may be nominally targeted for this timeframe, I very much doubt it
> will be considered an acceptable replacement for g77 until some time
> afterwards. A working g95 and a g95 which is as good as (or better than)
> g77 for fortran 77 code are two totally different things.
For the benefit of understanding this issue by those not intimately
involved in Fortran business: Most closed-source Fortran compilers
consisted as two separate executables for about a decade before the
Fortran 90/95 compiler was "good enough" at the Fortran 77 stuff to be
the only offering.
We hope to work faster than that, but don't hold your breath.
--
Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc-g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)
More information about the Gcc
mailing list