Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!quintus!ok
From: ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Common Compilers for benchmarks (was: Re: benchmarking)
Keywords: gcc silicon compilers RTL MIPS
Message-ID: <609@quintus.UUCP>
Date: 31 Oct 88 09:57:24 GMT
References: <7352@wright.mips.COM> <26627@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: news@quintus.UUCP
Reply-To: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc.
Lines: 17

In article <26627@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> shs@ji.Berkeley.EDU (Steve Schoettler) writes:
>In article <7352@wright.mips.COM> earl@mips.COM (Earl Killian) writes:
>>I think it would be interesting to benchmark various different
>>machines using gcc as the compiler.

>So, I think what you'll find from such a study is which machine most
>closely resembles the abstract machine Richard Stallman et al 
>had in mind when the RTL was designed.

It looks to me as though many of the newer machines are designed with
C and Fortran *only* in mind.  That's just a comment from someone who
reads the manuals:  could anyone who really knows say to what extent
ADA and COBOL were studied _when the arhictectures were being designed_?
(And no, I am not suggesting that RISCs should have special EDIT
instructions like the /370, B6700, or VAX.  I just don't see discussion
in the manuals along the lines of here are the pieces you need for the
following ADA or COBOL constructs.)