DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > DaemonForums.org > News

News News regarding BSD and related.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 10th April 2011
Mr-Biscuit Mr-Biscuit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 272
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default PCC reached version 1.0

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/it...0-1220995.html

A little late but still good news.
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 11th April 2011
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Any recent updates on the OpenBSD+PCC combo?
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 11th April 2011
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

Not really, no, Anders Magnusson had commit access to OpenBSD's CVS repository once.. but he hasn't committed since 2009.

There hasn't been any commits to pcc in OpenBSD's tree lately, It seems as if developer interest has died down a bit.. mostly due to PCC only supporting i386/amd64 primarily at the moment.

OpenBSD will probably continue using GCC until maintaining their forks of gcc2/3/4 is no longer feasible.. they can't port bugfixes from upstream GCC due to the license change to GPLv3, fixes have to be done independently or taken from other forks.
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 11th April 2011
ocicat ocicat is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,873
Thanked 190 Times in 160 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BSDfan666 View Post
OpenBSD will probably continue using GCC until maintaining their forks of gcc2/3/4 is no longer feasible..
The OpenBSD project will continue to use gcc(1) until there is a viable alternative which supports all platforms in which the project supports.
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 13th April 2011
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

I really wonder what is worse nightmare, having to implement the necessary ports of PCC, or maintain the relevant pieces of GCC :-/.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 14th April 2011
backrow backrow is offline
Real Name: Anthony J. Bentley
Shell Scout
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 116
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Default

There is some C++ in Xenocara, notably Mesa. So either it will have to be rewritten or disabled, or gcc will be kept around to deal with it.

Architecture support is improving in PCC (such as MIPS, iirc) but currently not up to the OpenBSD standard either. PCC is easy to extend to new architectures—the i386 port took only a few days—but that requires someone willing to work on and maintain the compiler for that architecture…
__________________
Many thanks to the forum regulars who put time and effort into helping others solve their problems.
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 14th April 2011
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 758
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by backrow View Post
There is some C++ in Xenocara, notably Mesa. So either it will have to be rewritten or disabled, or gcc will be kept around to deal with it.
PCC is intended to be a system compiler. One could argue that Mesa and Xenocara are not part of the core system but provided as a convenience to users. Compiling Xenocara is usually never needed. If you need to compile Xenorara GCC could be pulled as a dependence just like it is going to be pulled for many ports. There are even ports like MPlayer that explicitly require GCC and can not be compiled with any other open or close source compilers.
Reply With Quote
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 14th April 2011
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

Xenocara is part of the base system, as is Mesa.

Building the userland, including X, has never involved the ports tree.. and while regular users are not encouraged to build X themselves, that doesn't mean it isn't a critical component of the base system that gets built by the developers.

These days it's almost discouraged NOT to install the X sets.
Reply With Quote
  #9   (View Single Post)  
Old 14th April 2011
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 758
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BSDfan666 View Post
Xenocara is part of the base system, as is Mesa.

Building the userland, including X, has never involved the ports tree.. and while regular users are not encouraged to build X themselves, that doesn't mean it isn't a critical component of the base system that gets built by the developers.

These days it's almost discouraged NOT to install the X sets.
Then I can easily see the situation in the future in which there would be choice for OpenBSD either to completely fork X and kill C++ Mesa (and possibly some other things which might in future be written in C++) or to add support for C++ to PCC which is probably even more difficult.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
jggimi's Avatar
jggimi jggimi is offline
More noise than signal
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,609
Thanked 214 Times in 189 Posts
Default

Point of clarification -- the encouragement is for xbase*.tgz only, which may be needed for select ports.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jggimi View Post
Point of clarification -- the encouragement is for xbase*.tgz only, which may be needed for select ports.
But we're talking about building, in which case all of Xenocara is compiled and then the sets are built.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
jggimi's Avatar
jggimi jggimi is offline
More noise than signal
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,609
Thanked 214 Times in 189 Posts
Default

But you were talking about "encourged to install" -- but no biggie, sorry for the confusion.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

For C++, it may be a moot point for PCC, from the referenced article ->
Quote:
Future plans include a nearly-complete F77 compiler and a C++ front end that is mid-way through development.
. Which would likely make it even more effort for OpenBSDs non x86-related platforms.

Last I can remember, OpenBSD did have support for C, C++, and Fortran but it's been a while since I've cuddled up to OpenBSDs base system.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
rocket357's Avatar
rocket357 rocket357 is online now
Real Name: Jonathon
Wannabe OpenBSD porter
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 317
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryP View Post
For C++, it may be a moot point for PCC, from the referenced article -> . Which would likely make it even more effort for OpenBSDs non x86-related platforms.
As long as there's a good clean separation between parsers and code generators (yes, that's an extreme oversimplification), a C++ frontend shouldn't really impact the architecture-specific code generators. Perhaps I've oversimplified to the point of overlooking issues, but my understanding is that keeping the frontend and backend as separate as possible (something that gcc does a piss-poor job of) alleviates these issues.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jggimi View Post
But you were talking about "encourged to install" -- but no biggie, sorry for the confusion.
But I said almost!
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
ocicat ocicat is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,873
Thanked 190 Times in 160 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocket357 View Post
Perhaps I've oversimplified to the point of overlooking issues, but my understanding is that keeping the frontend and backend as separate as possible (something that gcc does a piss-poor job of) alleviates these issues.
Actually this is correct, & I can vouch that one commercial i386 compiler did just this. Front-end problems were completely divorced from code generation issues.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
rocket357's Avatar
rocket357 rocket357 is online now
Real Name: Jonathon
Wannabe OpenBSD porter
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 317
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocicat View Post
Actually this is correct, & I can vouch that one commercial i386 compiler did just this. Front-end problems were completely divorced from code generation issues.
I own and read the dragon book...but I've never written a compiler, so my information is all theory and no practice... it's good to know that the theory matches reality (if even only sometimes) heh

I've actually considered digging into the PCC code and seeing what I can do to help it along...but I rarely have time for side projects =\
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
ocicat ocicat is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,873
Thanked 190 Times in 160 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocket357 View Post
...it's good to know that the theory matches reality (if even only sometimes) heh
Everything is fair in love & war & compiler implementation, but separation between front-end syntax checking, intermediate parse tree creation, & back-end code generation can be an easy discipline to maintain. With as many processors that gcc supports, one would think that separating out the code generation code would be a given, but I haven't looked at it, so I can only conjecture.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 758
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocicat View Post
With as many processors that gcc supports, one would think that separating out the code generation code would be a given
GCC doesn't separate back and front ends by design!!! RMS was afraid that such a properly designed compiler would be more interested for industry to "steal" . You can find about some of similar "bright" ideas and the reasons for their implementation from various e-mail list all over the Internet.
Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2011
rocket357's Avatar
rocket357 rocket357 is online now
Real Name: Jonathon
Wannabe OpenBSD porter
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 317
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oko View Post
You can find about some of similar "bright" ideas and the reasons for their implementation from various e-mail list all over the Internet.
I looked, because I remember reading that RMS had intentionally "misdesigned" gcc like you described, but for the life of me I couldn't find the mailing list thread I remember reading that in.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pkg_add_it - new version DNAeon FreeBSD Ports and Packages 5 14th November 2010 01:43 AM
Ports Version associated with FreeBSD version rtwingfield FreeBSD Ports and Packages 4 7th June 2010 11:00 PM
LLVM milestone reached - Clang compiler self-hosts J65nko News 0 5th February 2010 03:48 PM
pop3d: Maximum connection limit reached for ... kheled FreeBSD General 1 25th June 2008 05:16 PM
How I can have two version of zsh mfaridi FreeBSD Ports and Packages 7 15th May 2008 05:56 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick