- Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:07 pm
#461
Nice blast from the past. Funny thing, I keep an eye on open-source compilers (why? this thread gives good answer - I want to have a compiler which can be hacked in couple of hours for completely new arch; none qualifies, so I keep looking - for many-many years now) - and I never heard of Open64. Can you believe there was time when people researched and implemented new advanced compilers, and it wasn't GCC/LLVM duopoly (each of which is pretty mediocre)?
By checking Open64 features list? No worries, it doesn't support Xtensa at all. But if you have some Itanium hardware rusting in your basement, it can, besides the usual x86 crap. That's why nobody heard about it - who needs a compiler for just couple of archs? Funny thing is that Open64 is GPL, so where's the heck is XCC source? Or did they license it from SGI yet before GPL times?
Squonk wrote:Here is an important hint: Tensilica's XCC compiler is not only based on GCC, but also on Open64:
http://ip.cadence.com/uploads/pdf/XCC%2 ... erview.pdf
http://www.open64.net/
Maybe our 106Micro core is better supported (call0) than in pure GCC?
Nice blast from the past. Funny thing, I keep an eye on open-source compilers (why? this thread gives good answer - I want to have a compiler which can be hacked in couple of hours for completely new arch; none qualifies, so I keep looking - for many-many years now) - and I never heard of Open64. Can you believe there was time when people researched and implemented new advanced compilers, and it wasn't GCC/LLVM duopoly (each of which is pretty mediocre)?
so how can we check if Open64 is using call0 vs. windowed ABI?
By checking Open64 features list? No worries, it doesn't support Xtensa at all. But if you have some Itanium hardware rusting in your basement, it can, besides the usual x86 crap. That's why nobody heard about it - who needs a compiler for just couple of archs? Funny thing is that Open64 is GPL, so where's the heck is XCC source? Or did they license it from SGI yet before GPL times?
