Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!virginia!kesmai!dca
From: dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: lattice/MANX bug when compiling large programs
Message-ID: <191@kesmai.COM>
Date: 7 Oct 88 21:30:30 GMT
References: <4424@louie.udel.EDU> <188@kesmai.COM> <12624@oberon.USC.EDU>
Organization: Kesmai Corporation, Charlottesville, VA
Lines: 41

In article <12624@oberon.USC.EDU>, papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes:
> In article <188@kesmai.COM> dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes:
> I (Marco Papa) say:
> || I am trying to compile a VERY large C program and so far I haven't been
> || successful with either MANX 3.60 or Lattice 4.00.

> |How modularized is this program?  I have noticed that the subroutine
> |linkages in Lattice are actually BSRs to a series of JMPS (one for
> |each of the subroutines you access external to your module).  If a
> |single compiland is too large then the BSR to the jump table could
> |fail so you might run into trouble even though the entire program size
> |can be quite large.  You might be able to fix your problem with some
> |judicious splitting of the source into separate compilands.  Just a thought.
> 
> The program is *ONE* module, 256K worth of source code.  4 UNIX compilers
> have no problem with it. I have no more compilation problems with Lattice
> after using the -r0 -b0 switches, EXCEPT that Lattice generates BAD code
> (BBS.S with odd address). The point I am trying to make is that neither
> of the two C compilers on the Amiga come even close to the ones on UNIX.
> I don't want to start "kludgin the code", just because the compiler is
> BROKEN. I'll just go back to UNIX.
> 
I was out to lunch anyway.  The instructions were JSRs not BSRs.
I'm kind of surprised that you are surprised.  Due to the 'come from
below' philosophy of compilers on micros they very frequently choke
and die on large programs.  I have found that compilers that people
are so enamored of because they compile so fast often choke and die
and the kind of programs I need to compile.  More often than not
compilers seem to be designed for modest amounts of code.
Unix system compilers have been designed from the start for serious
projects, not for speed or ability to run in a small environment
and thus tend to be much more tolerant.  I consider myself lucky if
the compiler can handle binding several reasonable size modules into
one very large one.

I can understand your desire to not mess with the code but I wouldn't
consider breaking a 256K, single module source file, into multiple modules
exactly kludging.  I'll spare everyone the commentaries about software
engineering.

David Albrecht