home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!forney.berkeley.edu!jbuck
- From: jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
- Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
- Subject: Re: Public Domain C Compiler?
- Date: 6 Jan 1993 21:11:46 GMT
- Organization: U. C. Berkeley
- Lines: 32
- Message-ID: <1ifhuiINNns7@agate.berkeley.edu>
- References: <C0FuFu.o41@austin.ibm.com> <1993Jan6.161245.4926@umr.edu> <OZ.93Jan6152628@ursa.sis.yorku.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: forney.berkeley.edu
-
- In article <OZ.93Jan6152628@ursa.sis.yorku.ca> oz@ursa.sis.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes:
- >Michael R Castle writes:
- >
- > Writing a compiler is a daunting project (ask the FSF!). Writing a portable
- > compiler, even more so.
- >
- >There is LCC from princeton. The backends [that optimize as well
- >or better as GCC] are not available except by special educational
- >arrangement, but one can [for example] adapt arizona PO as a
- >backend...
-
- The question was about public domain compilers; as your posting makes
- clear, LCC isn't even freely distributable. As for your claim that
- LCC optimizes as well as or better than GCC, this may be true, but
- it would be interesting to see actual benchmarks (e.g. SPECmark
- values) to back up such claims.
-
- And take a look at this:
- > Production code generators for the VAX, MIPS, and Motorola 68020 are
- > available for research use to universities willing to execute a license
- > agreement. Contact Chris Fraser (cwf@research.att.com) for details.
- > These code generators are automatically generated from compact
- > specifications, but neither the specifications nor their processor is
- > available, only the generated code generators.
-
- Even if a university executes a license, the most interesting part of
- the compiler for those who would port to new platforms is not available.
-
-
-
- --
- Joe Buck jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu
-