[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: Icarus Verilog building from CVS

On Aug 9, 2004, at 6:25 AM, Lars Segerlund wrote:
I agree on most of your points, but I still think you have a problem with either the compile time options for gcc or the flags, and I can understand your position on not pursuing it further.
I am willing to chalk it up to suboptimal compile flags...I know my way around GCC's options, but I'm not an expert in that area.

Just out of quriosity, what kind of code are you using ? ie. what category as I am using CFD similar memory intensive code. just curious.
The example I cited is a real-time image processing application. It transfers video frames over the network and processes them in memory, performing various spatial algorithms such as convolution and averaging. The frames are usually around 300KB in memory. It is written to be as cache-friendly as possible on the target platform. It is UltraSPARC-specific, as some of the libraries use the VIS instruction set (a SIMD implementation found on UltraSPARC processors).

Well, gcc 3.5 is getting more stable day to day, but I would recommend that you pulled it from cvs and did a make bootstrap, any errors occuring should be fixed within a week or two if you send a mail to the gcc list. I haven't got a sparc workstation handy so I can't help you.
  I will make some time to do that.

Interesting for you as a c++ user, ( I think you used c++ no ? ), is that there is a new frontend parser for c++ which 'might' be a bit better than the old :-) ...
No, just the opposite...I'm a C guy, no C++ here. But thanks for the advice anyway. :-)

I have built gcc for x86, alpha, mips32 and m68k fairly straight out of the box so I am a bit surprised.
I was surprised too...I've always been accustomed to it building cleanly on many platforms.


Dave McGuire "...it's a matter of how tightly
Cape Coral, FL you pull the zip-tie." -Nadine Miller