home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.compilers
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!wupost!think.com!spdcc!iecc!compilers-sender
- From: tmb@idiap.ch
- Subject: Re: Pros and cons of high-level intermediate languages
- Reply-To: tmb@idiap.ch
- Organization: IDIAP (Institut Dalle Molle d'Intelligence Artificielle Perceptive)
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:25:40 GMT
- Approved: compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us
- Message-ID: <92-07-080@comp.compilers>
- References: <92-07-064@comp.compilers> <92-07-068@comp.compilers>
- Keywords: C, translator, optimize
- Sender: compilers-sender@iecc.cambridge.ma.us
- Lines: 21
-
- boehm@parc.xerox.com (Hans Boehm) writes:
-
- [various specific problems with generating C code as the output
- of a compiler, related to GC, tail-recursion optimization, etc.]
-
- My impression is that for vaguely Pascal-like languages (e.g. Mesa),
- compiling through C generally loses very little performance, and may in
- fact win, if it's done sufficiently carefully. For Scheme or ML-like
- languages, life is a little harder. You either lose some performance, or
- you have to make some other compromises.
-
- Since C does seem to be accepted and popular as an intermediate
- language, it might be worth trying to get the C standard to
- incorporate some features that make this particular use easier.
-
- Thomas.
- [How about some suggestions? Standards are supposed to codify existing
- practice, though I freely admit that hasn't often been the case lately. -John]
- --
- Send compilers articles to compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us or
- {ima | spdcc | world}!iecc!compilers. Meta-mail to compilers-request.
-