[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2007/01/29]
Andy Armstrong wrote: > > I seem to remember that the Norcroft ARM C compiler did quite an > impressive job of register colouring and generally working out which > variables were worth keeping in registers. Certainly better than GCC at > the time (about 10 years ago). 2 years ago, both the ARM and the Green Hills C++ compilers didn't do so well. The Green Hills compiler deals very well with MIPS or PowerPC, and it has a lot of ARM-specific hacks (like loading 4 coordinates of a rectangle structure with LDM to compute it's area, and emitting a lot of non-trivial shifter operands and conditioning). > >> In fact I don't know if it's the compilers or the questionable choice >> to save registers and instead add optional bells and whistles to each >> and every instruction. > > > Questionable my arse! That's what made it so great to program :) > Well, I believe that if someone had enough fun with something to mention one's rear end in an argument about it, that something has probably got at least some important things right :) I probably agree that ARM is the best assembly target among the RISC machines because of the design of it's ISA. I only claimed that it's a worse C target than other RISC machines. And of course I can't really prove that either - that's just my impression based on the work with certain compilers.There's stuff above here
Generated at 23:01 on 06 Feb 2007 by mariachi 0.52