Re: [Pnet-developers] Porting work remaining question

[Peter Colson]

On 08/10/2004, at 1:18 AM, Gopal V wrote:

> I'd rather say "up, up and away !" :)

Having looked at libgc I'm thinking 'onwards and upwards'...

Porting that to the 400 seems an issue given the requirement
(according to it's setjmp_t test prog) for an assembler version
of GC_push_regs. The 400 doesn't provide access to native
machine code hence no register access.

I've posted a question to the gc mailing list, but has there been
any in-depth experience with libgc in the pnet world or has it
simply been a case of plug it in and watch it go?


Regards,
Peter Colson.