Hello all (and especially David :)
now that GCC 4.0 has been released, should GDC start moving toward supporting it?  Please don't take this as an attempt to pester anyone, I know that time is a precious thing and I'm not asking anyone to go out of their way.
I am interested in tinkering with GDC + GCC4.0 myself, and I was wondering what might be involved with getting the D frontend working with GCC?  I know that one of the major issues is that code generation is now based from SSA trees, what are some of the other stumbling blocks?

Thanks
Brad

Brad Beveridge wrote:
> Hello all (and especially David :)
> now that GCC 4.0 has been released, should GDC start moving toward supporting it?  Please don't take this as an attempt to pester anyone, I know that time is a precious thing and I'm not asking anyone to go out of their way.
> I am interested in tinkering with GDC + GCC4.0 myself, and I was wondering what might be involved with getting the D frontend working with GCC?  I know that one of the major issues is that code generation is now based from SSA trees, what are some of the other stumbling blocks?
> 
> Thanks
> Brad

I think I have most of the changes required for 4.0 done, but have not tried to build it yet.  There are probably a lot little things that need to be fixed.  The only major problem I see now is that the tricks I used for inline assembly probably won't work anymore.

David

David Friedman wrote:
| I think I have most of the changes required for 4.0 done, but have not
| tried to build it yet.  There are probably a lot little things that
| need to be fixed.  The only major problem I see now is that the tricks
| I used for inline assembly probably won't work anymore.

Any chances to see your progress via some read-only access?
I'd be really interrested to take a look or 2. *g*

Thomas

Thomas Kühne wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> David Friedman wrote:
> | I think I have most of the changes required for 4.0 done, but have not
> | tried to build it yet.  There are probably a lot little things that
> | need to be fixed.  The only major problem I see now is that the tricks
> | I used for inline assembly probably won't work anymore.
> 
> Any chances to see your progress via some read-only access?
> I'd be really interrested to take a look or 2. *g*
> 
> Thomas
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
> 
> iD8DBQFCa8+L3w+/yD4P9tIRAgy5AJ4v2peavAH+pHu3oLwRrU03qXcv6gCgtZF0
> 2KERX+0CU3nxMkYdkqIW8Zg=
> =6YDD
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

It's allready in 11pre1!  Grep on 'GCC_VER.*40'.

David

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Friedman schrieb am Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:51:18 -0400:
> Thomas Kühne wrote:
>> 
>> David Friedman wrote:
>> | I think I have most of the changes required for 4.0 done, but have not
>> | tried to build it yet.  There are probably a lot little things that
>> | need to be fixed.  The only major problem I see now is that the tricks
>> | I used for inline assembly probably won't work anymore.
>> 
>> Any chances to see your progress via some read-only access? I'd be really interrested to take a look or 2. *g*
>> 
>> Thomas
>
> It's allready in 11pre1!  Grep on 'GCC_VER.*40'.

Thanks!

How could I miss that *g*

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFCbin93w+/yD4P9tIRArkBAJ95ciOwtuaGKDlQlREpH0hoZEClXQCgwNWH
QsQs4KX9PAxDzOWqRF5Fcy8=
=aFj8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----