Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 22:17:06 +1030 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, terry@lambert.org, jdp@polstra.com, nate@sneezy.sri.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GAS question Message-ID: <199603171147.WAA19417@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199603171115.MAA09356@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de> from "Christoph P. Kukulies" at Mar 17, 96 12:14:59 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christoph P. Kukulies stands accused of saying: > > > > VC++ is targeted to _one_ processor. GCC supports several dozen. > > This ain't quite true. VC++ is also targeted to Alpha axp and - I don't > have my VC++ 4.0 CD handy right now - I believe to other platforms as > well. OK, I'll rephrase it then; VC++'s code generator was designed with a single target in mind, GCC was designed from the ground up to be target independant. As Bruce has observed, the GCC 'constraint' mechanism lets you tell the compiler in explicit terms what effect your code, or a call to an external routine, has on the state of the processor, in a general and portable fashion. In, say, an embedded environment, this saves you from having to wrap all your firmware calls in register save/restores. I'm sure it wins big elsewhere, that's just my personal experience with it 8) > --Chris Christoph P. U. Kukulies kuku@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de Speaking of personal experience, there's been a lot of bitching about Unix development tools going on. It's been my experience that many Unix-environment programmers are basically Luddites. There _are_ tools that fit at _least_ half of the wishlist items I've seen bandied about here, it's just that _nobody_uses_them_! For crying out loud, wasn't it you, Terry, that was complaining about not having an environment where you could click on a compiler error and jump to the offending line of source? Emacs has been doing that for as long as it's known what a mouse _is_. You want a debugger that will show you the source as you trace, will let you recompile, reload, breakpoint from where you were and start again? GDB swallowed in an emacs will do that too. ddd and ups are both wonderful tools. gdb-remote is so f*cking fantastic that Cisco appear to use it; cygnus certainly aren't going broke just yet, and gcc & co. are basically their bread and butter AFAIK. For all the spewage about Motif, the X4u stuff, particularly their DTP package, looks _gorgeous_. WordPerfect works, and doesn't suck too badly either. Excess use of 'application frameworks' leads to 'framework applications'. Yetch. Who needs 'case statements'? That's what event bindings under any decent X-using toolkit are for. Kuku can complain that Tk may not ring his bell - if all he's talking about is its visuals, then I suggest that looking uder the hood at the work it takes off your program would be a good start. No, the tools aren't perfect. Yes, 'good enough' tools _do_ exist. I don't swallow the inverse-NIH, sorry. (Rant off. I just saw "Judge Dredd", and I didn't like it either. 8) -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603171147.WAA19417>