Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!world!iecc!compilers-sender From: landers@mabel.uucp Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Intergraph's Green Hills FORTRAN Compiler Keywords: Fortran Message-ID: <9105032245.AA19722@uunet.UU.NET> Date: 3 May 91 22:45:56 GMT Sender: compilers-sender@iecc.cambridge.ma.us Reply-To: landers@mabel.uucp Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 45 Approved: compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us I've been using the Green Hills FORTRAN and C compilers on the Intergraph workstations for a number of years. In fact, I'm currently developing and selling a number of products which have been compiled with the Green Hills compilers. I can sympathize with your friend! Compared to FORTRAN compilers on other Unix platforms, the Green Hills FORTRAN compiler isn't very good. It is slow, produces poor (but mostly correct!) code and generates huge executable files. To make matter worse, Green Hills won't help you if you call the phone number on the inside cover of the manual. Instead, they insist that all problems with their compilers must be logged with Intergraph via Integraph's 800 number. To be fair, the FORTRAN standard doesn't say much about the way objects are stored in memory, how big executable files will be or what size of the largest source module should be. Although it's been painful, I've been successful with it. One problem with the FORTRAN compiler is that Intergraph doesn't use FORTRAN very much for software development of their workstation products -- they use C and C++ instead. The Green Hills C product is a little better, although it's not an ANSI compiler. A bigger problem with their products, I believe, is that they're basically the same compilers they've been using since the mid-80's that've been tweaked a bit over the years. They're using pretty much the same optimizations and code generation even though the Clipper RISC architecture is now 10 to 20 times faster than it was when they started developing the product. Fetches and stores that weren't a problem at 5 mips can be real bottlenecks at 50 mips. How do compilers support dramatic speed changes even when the underlying RISC instruction set remains nearly the same? Do you re-write the back end every time the clock rate gets cranked up? How do developers, say SPARC compiler developers, manage the change? BTW, I've read that Intergraph's latest software release contains a new ANSI C compiler from a different vendor. Joe Landers TechniCon Computer Services 444 Spear St., Suite 213 phone: (415)-896-6313 San Francisco, CA. 94105 uucp: ..!uunet!mabel!landers -- Send compilers articles to compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us or {ima | spdcc | world}!iecc!compilers. Meta-mail to compilers-request.