Re: [Gomp-discuss] Somethings to think about ....

[Diego Novillo]

On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 19:27, Pop Sébastian wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 11:51:05PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> > Op ma 10-03-2003, om 23:02 schreef Pop Sébastian:
> > >I really think that 
> > > for the moment what we call GENERIC is what came out from C and C++ 
> > > without 
> > > worrying much about other languages as Fortran, Java, Ada, Pascal, ...
> > 
> > Well thank you very much :#
> > 
> I'm sorry but that was true at the moment when GENERIC was designed :-(
> and I think we'll not end with a suitable generic IR by just including nodes 
> as 
> it was been done until now.  I really think we should base our work on a 
> standard 
> and avoid, if possible, to reinvent the wheel.
> 
> Sorry again Steven, I wasn't thinking bad when I wrote that statement.  I 
> just 
> meant that GENERIC was mostly the union of the C and C++ front ends and that 
> its
> conception was mostly been based on the "empiric" discovery that front-end
> representations could be factored to a generic representation.  Here it would 
> be
> a good time to formalize a little this GENERIC representation.  We'll just 
> win in 
> the adoption of this standard, since the most of the semantics documentation 
> would
> be already there: the standard itself.  
>
Folks,

Sorry I haven't been more active, but I'm swamped with work.  I'll try
to add my thoughts to this thread later, but I couldn't let this one
pass.  Moving GCC to use CIL (is that the name?) will be a herculean
task.  And that doesn't take the political aspects into account :)

I really think that this is way beyond GOMP itself.  If you want to
propose such a change, you have to start a discussion on the GCC list.


Diego.