Re: [f-cpu] Winograd DCT on my seul.org account

[Michael Riepe <michael@stud.uni-hannover.de>]

On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:09:49AM +0200, djrom wrote:
[...]
> it cause the problem of gcc to (re)raise. optimisations for FC0 are very
> different from usual optimisations, even for RISC processors. I don't
> know the real structure of gcc, but I guess it'll be very difficult to
> put FC0 tricks without breaking the portability, no ? I even wonder if
> rewriting a new compiler won't be much easier than trying to add such
> things in gcc, if we want the compiler to be good. we don't want to see
> the F-Cpu ends like the PIV, used at less than 30%, right ?

I guess that writing a new C compiler will indeed be easier than
hacking gcc.

> moreover, we should perhaps think about another langage to be used
> on modern processors. C is very limited in his expressivity, so the
> operations like SIMD or "real" optimisations put a ton of work on the
> compiler's shoulders. it shouldn't just try to optimise, but it must even
> try to *understand* what the programmers meant. is there a langage really
> usable for modern RISC processors ? maybe we should try to return to lisp
> or ML, or something like that, no ? that's could also be a way to promote
> new langages: I don't want 2030's processors to be always coded in C ! :-)

And I don't want to be unable to code in C in 2030. I like lisp, but...

C is very limited in its expressivity? Huh?

> if *we* don't promote new langages, we won't be able to count on Intel
> to do it ! :-)

Our goal is not to promote programming languages. Neither is it Intel's.

-- 
 Michael "Tired" Riepe <Michael.Riepe@stud.uni-hannover.de>
 "All I wanna do is have a little fun before I die"
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/