Re: Q: access to subprogram

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

dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
> Ronald is still missing the point that started this thread. 

You are missing the point that I am solely taking exception to your
categorizing gcc as a "single backend" compiler and not the point that
started this thread.  At a meta level, gcc may look like one; but
under close scrutiny, it clearly isn't.

> The other kind of technology uses a single common source base for all
> backends. GCC is in this category. Yes, the configuration files differ,
> but the great majority of the code is common. This is a critical feature
> of GCC, and is what allows easy porting of the technology. To port to
> a new architecture, a new configuration file needs to be written, but
> not a new code generator.

If this were true, then gcc could be made to read the md files
directly.  But since it can't due to some of the code generation
shenanigans that go on in an md file; well, I'll let you figure it
out...

-- 
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