I've spent too much time caring about no compiler but the C compiler, so I've learned something. Apparently they've split compilers into front-ends (which parse languages), middleware (that does some of the optimization that isn't either language dependent or processor dependent) and a backend (which generates the machine code for the target processor). I had always thought of C as the target of the front end so I snickered at the acronym "Gnu Compiler Collection", but really I wasn't paying attention.
On 3/16/07, Greg Lindahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 02:14:06PM -0500, Peter St. John wrote: > I'd be optimistic for the process of translating F to C, followed by > compiling the C, to be as effecient as the process of compiling C into > assembler, followed by assmbling into executable. I'm not optimistic. The process destroys info. It's not that Fortran compilers are better at optimizing... most Fortran compilers are also C compilers. It's that Fortran as a language is easier to optimize, and Fortran programmers tend to write easier to optimize programs (more arrays, less pointers.) When you translate to C, automatic or not, you usually lose both properties. -- greg _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
