February 29, 2004 Generic and Gimple to be incorporated in gcc 3.5 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
I read in the gcc page today (http://gcc.gnu.org/) "The tree-ssa branch has been frozen to be incorporated into GCC 3.5.0. Tree SSA incorporates two new high-level intermediate languages (GENERIC and GIMPLE), an optimization framework for GIMPLE based on the Static Single Assignment (SSA) representation, several SSA-based optimizers and various other improvements to the internal structure of the compiler that allow new optimization opportunities that were difficult to implement before." This is a language independent internal representation and is goood news for the d.gnu project, see http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/tree-ssa/ Pablo De Napoli |
February 29, 2004 Re: Generic and Gimple to be incorporated in gcc 3.5 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Pablo De Naapoli | "Pablo De Naapoli" <Pablo_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:c1t0gs$29qp$1@digitaldaemon.com... > I read in the gcc page today (http://gcc.gnu.org/) > > "The tree-ssa branch has > been frozen to be incorporated into GCC 3.5.0. Tree > SSA incorporates two new > high-level intermediate languages (GENERIC and > GIMPLE), an optimization > framework for GIMPLE based on the Static Single > Assignment (SSA) > representation, several SSA-based optimizers and various > other improvements to > the internal structure of the compiler that allow new > optimization > opportunities that were difficult to implement before." > > This is a language > independent internal representation and is goood news > for the d.gnu project, > see > > http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/tree-ssa/ > > Pablo De Napoli Cool. Thanks for posting the links. I'm looking forward to being able to use GENERIC. I'm starting to bump up against "the hard stuff" in converting the D tree from DMD to a C++ tree. I've almost got classes supported but it's temporarily put on the back burner until I get the method name mangled. For some reason the call site mangles the name fine but the function definition is unmangled. very strange. Maybe once the CPP front end is converted to GENERIC/GIMPLE will be easier to see what is going on. Of course the mangling should be done by D but I haven't even tried that yet... -Ben |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation