[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] TinyCC's future

From: Peter Fröhlich
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] TinyCC's future
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:34:17 -0700

Hi all,

On Apr 11, 2005, at 04:30, address@hidden wrote:

I just have wrotten a IA32 backend, something like lightning but only for IA32 (RtAsm aka Runtime assembler); I use it to generate runtime code. It would be easy built a bytecode intermediate language and use it as middle representation between fron and back ends. TCC then only move C code into RtAsm and this one
into IA32, RISC or PPC etc.

Just my $0.02 again: If you split the compiler into frontend and backend, it is worth considering using a higher-level structure like an AST instead of linear bytecode, at least if the size of the backends is a concern at all. It's easier to process an AST into decent code in one pass, harder to do on lower-level representations.

I am assuming that nobody is actually suggesting turning tcc into a highly optimizing compiler? Then a linear representation (based on SSA probably) would be a good choice, but I don't think that would be in the "spirit" of the tcc project.

Peter H. Froehlich <><><><><><> http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~phf/
OpenPGP: ABC2 9BCC 1445 86E9 4D59  F532 A8B2 BFAE 342B E9D9

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]