On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 05:22:34PM +0000, paul.kon...@dell.com wrote: > I think G-J said "... LRA focusses just comfortable, orthogonal targets" > which is not quite the same thing. > > I'm a bit curious about that, since x86 is hardly "comfortable orthogonal". > But if LRA is targeted only at some of the ISA styles that are out in the > world, which ones are they, and why the limitation?
LRA does better with more regular register sets, but then again, everything has a much easier time with regular register sets. > One of GCC's great strength is its support for many ISAs. 100% agreed. > Not all to the same level of excellence, but there are many, and adding more > is easy at least for an initial basic level of support. When this is needed, > GCC is the place to go. > > I'd like to work on moving one of the remaining CC0 targets to the new way, > but if the reality is that GCC is trying to be "mainstream only" then that > may not be a good way for me to spend my time. That is not at all GCC's goal. See the mission statement: https://gcc.gnu.org/gccmission.html More often used platforms naturally get better support, have more people working on them. And for releases those platforms are more important than others, which is just a practical thing (bugs on those affect more people, it can be hard to find people to solve a problem on a minority platform quickly enough). https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-8/criteria.html But all targets matter, variety is good, also in GCC's self-interest. Segher
