rick at linuxmafia.com
Fri Mar 23 08:01:04 PST 2001
begin Rafe Magnuson quotation:
> Ah, I should have waited about two more seconds before my last post,
> as the information you present below is most useful. It brings me to
> wonder though, why is egcs so much more portable than something like
That's a good question. I wish I were a competent authority on
compilers, since as things stand I lack the background to get this
answer. However, I'm sure the gcc development team would be able to
explain matters, if one of us asks.
> Certainly I can see machines of the x86 class being of use still,
> but don't most people have at the very least a pentium 1 class processor
> (gasp! a p90! or a p60!)? Or am I missing the point entirely here?
Yes, but don't forget that the idea of gcc is to have a compiler
portable across multiple CPU _architectures_, not just multiple
generations of x86. Alpha, m68k, PPC, StrongARM, PA-RISC, SPARC....
Cheers, Right to keep and bear
Rick Moen Haiku shall not be abridged
rick at linuxmafia.com Or denied. So there.
More information about the talk