Re: Q: access to subprogram

[Ronald Cole <ronald@ridgecrest.ca.us>]

kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes:
> What you are actually counting are thirty distinct configuration files
> used to tailor the single backend to a particular target machine.

"Tailor"!  Yes, my point exactly.  The day gcc can read md files
directly is the day I agree that it is a single backend.  Gcc is
really multiple backend with a meta-layer that gives the appearance of
a single backend.

> So long as you state the definitions you are using, you are free to
> use any you want.  But whatever words you use, there is a major
> distinction between the GCC approach and that used by other
> multi-target systems.

IMO, the gcc approach lives somewhere between single and multiple
backend.  You probably remember well the wailing and gnashing of teeth
from the CISC-owners when gcc went from version 1 (handled CISC
well/RISC not-so-well) to version 2 (handles RISC much better/CISC
not-as-well-as-version-1/holds "inbetween architectures" like the
Pentium in contempt).

But this thread has travelled well off topic for this group and this
is my last post on the subject.

-- 
Ronald Cole                                     E-mail: ronald@ridgecrest.ca.us
President, CEO                                          zippy@ecst.csuchico.edu
Forte International                                Fax: (619) 384-2346
     My PGP fingerprint: E9 A8 E3 68 61 88 EF 43  56 2B CE 3E E9 8F 3F 2B