Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cca!mirror!ima!johnl
From: johnl@ima.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Recommendable 68k C compilers
Message-ID: <683@ima.ISC.COM>
Date: Thu, 20-Aug-87 15:18:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: ima.683
Posted: Thu Aug 20 15:18:11 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Aug-87 01:28:36 EDT
Sender: johnl@ima.ISC.COM
Reply-To: decvax!ucbvax!hplabs!felix!preston (Preston Bannister)
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 27
Approved: compilers@ima.UUCP
In-Reply-To: <672@ima.ISC.COM>


In article <672@ima.ISC.COM> you write:
>I need to find out what optimizing C compilers exist for the 68000. I
>have found, based on personal experience, that while Green Hills makes
>an awesome optimizing compiler, it gives up too much performance by
>using 32 bit ints, and it would be too painful to change the existing
>code I need to compile.

We use the Green Hills compiler here.  I don't see how Green Hills
burns performance by using 32-bit ints.  Especially since they seem to
benchmark faster than any other compiler!  :-)  In general it seems to
be a win, as the compiler places variables in registers whenever
possible, and the 68000's registers are 32-bit.  My first take was that
16-bit int's might be more efficient, but there is some added overhead
for clearing out the upper part of the register.

Can you justify your statement?
-- 
Preston L. Bannister
USENET	   :	ucbvax!trwrb!felix!preston
BIX	   :	plb
CompuServe :	71350,3505
GEnie      :	p.bannister
--
Send compilers articles to ima!compilers or, in a pinch, to Levine@YALE.ARPA
Plausible paths are { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale | cca}!ima
Please send responses to the originator of the message -- I cannot forward
mail accidentally sent back to compilers.  Meta-mail to ima!compilers-request