Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: GCC 5.0 Compiler Might Be On The Way

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,080

    Default GCC 5.0 Compiler Might Be On The Way

    Phoronix: GCC 5.0 Compiler Might Be On The Way

    GCC developers have brought up the topic of tagging a GCC 5.0 release soon based upon recent changes...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyMjA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    147

    Default stupid OSS moves as always

    Instead of making real progress they seem to be drooling over stupid version number.

    Who cares about LRA, NBA, C++ internals etc ?

    I want PERFORMANCE ( of the compiler as wall as compiled code) and good, defined user interface.

    I couldn't care less if it is written in brainfuck and uses random code generation.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    767

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brane215 View Post
    Instead of making real progress they seem to be drooling over stupid version number.
    Or, you know - they spend hours each day working on the compiler, and take a break for five minutes to argue on the mailing list.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delgarde View Post
    Or, you know - they spend hours each day working on the compiler, and take a break for five minutes to argue on the mailing list.
    Well then, that puts whole thing in entirely different perspective. Why don't they go for 6.0 to make bigger impact then ?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    857

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brane215 View Post
    Well then, that puts whole thing in entirely different perspective. Why don't they go for 6.0 to make bigger impact then ?
    They could also hire a troll, are you employed?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    They could also hire a troll, are you employed?
    No, but I just couldn't survive that competition...
    Last edited by Brane215; 11-06-2012 at 03:40 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    857

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brane215 View Post
    No, but I just couldn't survive that competition...
    Don't be shy, you're doing a good work here.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paris/France
    Posts
    40

    Default It seems so obvious to everybody, but ...

    What is "reload" ?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orzel View Post
    What is "reload" ?
    My point EXACTLY. WTF really cares outside developer circle ?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    110

    Default Well, let me google that for you...

    Quote Originally Posted by orzel View Post
    What is "reload" ?
    What is reload?

    Reload is the GCC equivalent of Satan. See [gccsource:reload.c], [gccsource:reload1.c], and [gccsource:reload.h] if you have a brave soul. (You'll probably also wind up looking at [gccsource:local-alloc.c] and [gccsource:global.c], the register allocator proper.)
    http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/reload

    In short t seems to be a bit of code that has become magic, that is it does loads of thing, but noone has really any knowledge anymore of how, and sometimes why. This makes the code hard to maintain and optimize. So getting rid of reload is probably one large step towards a cleaner codebase that is easier to understand, easier to maintain, and easier to optimize. So maybe getting rid or reloaded is for the maintainers of GCC the foothold to be able to get more performance out of GCC, resulting in what our little troll screams for.

    Edit: so yeah, I care mostly because it is exiting what this means for the future.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •