Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!hp4nl!fwi.uva.nl!betty!croes
From: croes@fwi.uva.nl (Felix A. Croes)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Minix needs a C compiler with source
Summary: write your own ACK compiler
Message-ID: <429@fwi.uva.nl>
Date: 19 Feb 90 10:50:36 GMT
References: <1050@trlluna.trl.oz>
Sender: news@fwi.uva.nl
Reply-To: croes@fwi.uva.nl (Felix A. Croes)
Organization: The Courts of Chaos
Lines: 43

In article <1050@trlluna.trl.oz> greg@ait.trl.oz (Greg Aumann) writes:
>It is becoming more and more obvoius that Minix needs a C compiler with
>source that can be distributed without restrictions and modified
>easily.  Problems caused by the current ACK compiler are that it is
>difficult to get bugs fixed.  There is little hope of seeing desirable
>extensions such as ANSI conformance etc.  Also you cannot look at the
>source and learn about compilers.  The original intention of using
>minix to teach OS courses or for self study could apply equally well to
>compilers if the source were available and readable.  Note when I write
>compiler I also mean to include an assembler and a loader.
The current compiler will be replaced by an ANSI C compiler in 2.0 - again, not
in source. On all other points, I agree.

[description of ideal Minix compiler deleted]
The ideal Minix compiler would be public domain (of course).

>The ACK compiler kit is out as it is much too big and expensive.  The
>source generated by the kit is also of little or no use as it is
>unmodifiable.  Gcc is also too big (although this may not apply in a
>few more years).
Gcc is too big, period. The ACK idea is fine, when trimmed down to what it
really is all about: using EM as an intermediate language.

[description of possible candidates deleted]
>
>Personally I think the best solution would be to find an existing
>compiler that is close to what we want and modify it.  This is because
>writing a compiler from scratch is a very large task and shouldn't be
>underestimated.  Would anyone who know of other possibly suitable
>compilers please also comment.
It seems to me that writing a compiler is never underestimated by anyone in this
newsgroup, rather the reverse applies. I propose the following: step by step
replace the existing ACK compiler by a public domain version.
A friend of mine is presently working on a ANSI C front end. Another friend is
working on a 68000 code generator. I have already written a loader for Minix ST
(shouldn't be too difficult to port it to the PC, once asld is split in a loader
and an assembler), and I an thinking about writing a C++ front end.

Comments?

--

Felix Croes    (croes@fwi.uva.nl)