It is a C/C++/Obj-C compiler does static analysis, has
backends for multiple processor types as well as C as a
target, a lot of optimization tricks etc.
22mbytes is still a lot of etc.. i've no objection
to optimisations big and small, but that still wouldn't explain
the size (to me). FORTRAN H
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:35:53 +, Charles Forsyth wrote:
It is a C/C++/Obj-C compiler does static analysis, has
backends for multiple processor types as well as C as a
target, a lot of optimization tricks etc.
... FORTRAN H Enhanced did so much with so little! ...
Is there a compiler that
FORTRAN H Enhanced was an early optimising compiler.
FORTRAN H for System/360, then FORTRAN H Extended for System/370;
FORTRAN H Enhanced added further insight to get better code.
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 09:46:00 +, Charles Forsyth wrote:
FORTRAN H Enhanced was an early optimising compiler.
FORTRAN H for System/360, then FORTRAN H Extended for System/370;
FORTRAN H Enhanced added further insight to get better code.
Ah. Thanks for the info. I asked because some of the
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:47:17AM -0600, EBo wrote:
Ah. Thanks for the info. I asked because some of the physicists and
atmospheric scientists I work with are likely to insist on having
FORTRAN. I still have not figured how I will deal with that if at
all.
If the cost can be met,
On Feb 2, 9:11 pm, quans...@quanstro.net (erik quanstrom) wrote:
On Wed Feb 2 05:04:07 EST 2011, nyanhtoo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Running plan 9 on virtual box 4.0.2, I've configured network
adaptaters as below.
Attached to NAT
Adapter type: PCnet-FAST 3(Am79C973)
check cable
In article be3e16017566e26d4074ae69bc9b1...@chula.quanstro.net,
erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
Even C has a runtime. Perhaps you should look more into how programming
languages are implemented :-). C++ has one too, especially in the wake of
exceptions and such.
really? what do
%: %.$O
$LD $LDFLAGS -o $target $prereq
Not a good idea. '%' matches everything, not just files with no suffix.
On the other hand, can anyone explain this?
term% cat foo.mk
%: /dev/null
echo making $target
term% mk -f foo.mk x.y
echo making x.y
making x.y
term% mk -f foo.mk x.y z.w
echo making x.y
making x.y
echo making z.w
making z.w
echo making command line arguments
making command line
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:16:05 am Richard Miller wrote:
%: %.$O
$LD $LDFLAGS -o $target $prereq
Perhaps wont' be a problem with mk(1), but make(1) had biten me more than once
with a rule like `-o $SOMEOUTPUT $SOMESOURCES'. When $SOMEOUTPUT was empty...
the source file
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:24:53 am dexen wrote:
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:16:05 am Richard Miller wrote:
%: %.$O
$LD $LDFLAGS -o $target $prereq
Perhaps wont' be a problem with mk(1), but make(1) had biten me more than
once with a rule like `-o $SOMEOUTPUT
On 3 February 2011 10:23, Richard Miller 9f...@hamnavoe.com wrote:
On the other hand, can anyone explain this?
term% mk -f foo.mk x.y z.w
echo making x.y
making x.y
echo making z.w
making z.w
echo making command line arguments
making command line arguments
term%
yes, it's because of
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:37:39AM +, roger peppe wrote:
you're not supposed to have a metarule with a target
that matches command line arguments!
What would break if mk had an empty rule matching command line
arguments itself?
++L
As this list seems to be open to discussion of strange OS-related ideas, here
goes my question:
why do we keep distinction between files and directories? Does it provide any
extra value over model with unified file/directory?
A possible consideration for representation of unified
Hi, Running plan 9 on virtual box 4.0.2, I've configured network
adaptaters as below.
Attached to NAT
Adapter type: PCnet-FAST 3(Am79C973)
check cable connected.
After booting plan 9, I typed ip/ipconfig, after waiting some time,
ipconfig: no success with DHCP.
I don't
why do we keep distinction between files and directories? Does it provide any
extra value over model with unified file/directory?
yes. the advantage is that it's easy to tell the difference
between a file and a directory. and we have a lot of code
that works with the current model.
what is
On Thu Feb 3 04:36:35 EST 2011, fors...@terzarima.net wrote:
The finished version will support strings backed by file storage
string(2) doesn't go quite that far, but is used by the mailer upas
and perhaps other things to reduce the instances of arbitrarily low limits
and bounds exceeded.
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns byte stream under entry `foo' in the root object.
readdir(/foo) returns `bar' (and possibly others) -- entries in hierarchical
section of object `/foo'.
there's no distinction between readdir and
On 3 February 2011 13:01, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
i think you're better off with char*s and realloc.
it's worth looking at the heavy machinery in sam
and acme, though, and comparing against ed.
i'd hesitate before trying to edit 500MB files in ed...
nor does ed cope with
On Thu Feb 3 08:39:20 EST 2011, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns byte stream under entry `foo' in the root object.
readdir(/foo) returns `bar' (and possibly others) -- entries in
hierarchical
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 02:05:02 pm erik quanstrom wrote:
why do we keep distinction between files and directories? Does it provide
any extra value over model with unified file/directory?
yes. the advantage is that it's easy to tell the difference
between a file and a directory.
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 02:36:40 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns byte stream under entry `foo' in the root
object.
readdir(/foo) returns `bar' (and possibly others) -- entries in
hierarchical
On Thu Feb 3 08:41:23 EST 2011, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 February 2011 13:01, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
i think you're better off with char*s and realloc.
it's worth looking at the heavy machinery in sam
and acme, though, and comparing against ed.
i'd hesitate
How about 8c(1)? would it be too confusing to issue:
8c foo.c
if `foo.c' contained some C code, AND `foo.c/bar.h' contained some more C
code?
rc(1)? How could `. foo.rc' handle situation when also
`foo.rc/bar.rc/baz.rc'
exists?
exactly. this is the same problem one has with
On 3 February 2011 13:44, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 02:36:40 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns byte stream under entry `foo' in the root
object.
i've found it very useful quite a few times.
usually with oversized log files.
On 3 February 2011 13:59, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
On Thu Feb 3 08:41:23 EST 2011, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 February 2011 13:01, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
i think you're
On Thu Feb 3 09:17:27 EST 2011, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
i've found it very useful quite a few times.
usually with oversized log files.
On 3 February 2011 13:59, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
On Thu Feb 3 08:41:23 EST 2011, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 February 2011
usually with oversized log files.
sam -d, indeed!
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 03:15:29 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 13:44, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 02:36:40 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 03:15:29 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 13:44, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 03, 2011 02:36:40 pm roger peppe wrote:
On 3 February 2011 11:45, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
read(open(/foo)) returns
On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
It is a C/C++/Obj-C compiler does static analysis, has
backends for multiple processor types as well as C as a
target, a lot of optimization tricks etc. See llvm.org. But
frankly, I think they have lost the plot. C
To be fair, gcc, g++ and gobjc combined are actually bigger than clang+llvm.
At least on my system. So it could have been worse.
2011/2/3 David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com
On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net
wrote:
It is a C/C++/Obj-C compiler does static
Plan 9 is a research operating system. It also happens that many
people who use it for research also use it in production.
Many of the engineering decisions that went into Plan 9 were a matter
of priorities. The creators of Plan 9 chose a simple, comprehensible C
compiler over more complex
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 12:45:33 +0100 dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com
wrote:
why do we keep distinction between files and directories?
David Cheriton's `thoth' operating system didn't keep this
distinction. But every other OS I know of keeps them
separate. IIRC thoth provided functions
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 07:08:57 PST David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
It is a C/C++/Obj-C compiler does static analysis, has
backends for multiple processor types as well as C as a
target, a lot of optimization
I agree with their goal but not its execution. I think a
toolkit for manipulating graph based program representations
to build optimizing compilers is a great idea but did they
do it in C++?
are you sure that the problem isn't the graph representation?
gcc also takes a graph-based approach.
EBo e...@sandien.com writes:
Ah. Thanks for the info. I asked because some of the physicists and
atmospheric scientists I work with are likely to insist on having
FORTRAN. I still have not figured how I will deal with that if at
all.
I thought those folks used languages like Matlab
Consider what `stalin' does in about 3300 lines of Scheme
code. It translates R4RS scheme to C and takes a lot of time
doing so but the code is generates is blazingly fast. The
kind of globally optimized C code you or I wouldn't have the
patience to write. Or the ability to keep all that
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:11:07 EST erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
I agree with their goal but not its execution. I think a
toolkit for manipulating graph based program representations
to build optimizing compilers is a great idea but did they
do it in C++?
are you sure that
dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com writes:
oh yes, maintaining the usual semantics for cp becomes tricky.
mkdir z
cp x.c z
do i mean to write x.c to z itself, or to a new file within z?
nb., with the current semantics you *could* say `cp x.c z/' to be unambiguous
you want to
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:21 AM, smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
EBo e...@sandien.com writes:
Ah. Thanks for the info. I asked because some of the physicists and
atmospheric scientists I work with are likely to insist on having
FORTRAN. I still have not figured how I will deal with that if
On Thu Feb 3 13:33:52 EST 2011, bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:11:07 EST erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net
wrote:
I agree with their goal but not its execution. I think a
toolkit for manipulating graph based program representations
to build optimizing
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:21:28 +, smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
Ah. Thanks for the info. I asked because some of the physicists and
atmospheric scientists I work with are likely to insist on having
FORTRAN. I still have not figured how I will deal with that if at
all.
I thought those folks
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:54:05 EST erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
On Thu Feb 3 13:33:52 EST 2011, bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:11:07 EST erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wr
ote:
I agree with their goal but not its execution. I think a
I must also say llvm has a lot of functionality. But even so
there is a lot of bloat. Let me just say the bloat is due to
many factors but it has far *less* to do with graphs.
Download llvm and take a peek. I think the chosen language
and the habits it promotes and the impedance match with
I don't know if f2c meets your needs, but it has always worked.
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:07 AM, EBo e...@sandien.com wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:38:30 +, C H Forsyth wrote:
it's not just the FORTRAN but supporting libraries, sometimes large ones,
including ones in C++, are often required
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Federico G. Benavento
benave...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if f2c meets your needs, but it has always worked.
As compared to modern fortran compilers, it is basically a toy.
ron
I don't know if f2c meets your needs, but it has always worked.
As compared to modern fortran compilers, it is basically a toy.
But he did say some of his source is in ratfor,
I am pretty sure f2c would be happy with ratfor's output.
years ago I supported the pafec FE package - tens of
On Thursday 03 of February 2011 19:42:39 smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com writes:
oh yes, maintaining the usual semantics for cp becomes tricky.
mkdir z
cp x.c z
do i mean to write x.c to z itself, or to a new file within z?
nb., with the
I don't write in fortran, but I certainly link to libraries written
in it. It is a truly awful language in any of its incarnations, but
sometimes the library you need is in fortran. Fortunately it's
not to hard to link to from C once you understand its calling
conventions and array ordering.
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 23:08:38 +, John Stalker wrote:
I don't write in fortran, but I certainly link to libraries written
in it. It is a truly awful language in any of its incarnations, but
sometimes the library you need is in fortran. Fortunately it's
not to hard to link to from C once you
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Bakul Shah bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 12:45:33 +0100 dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com
wrote:
why do we keep distinction between files and directories?
David Cheriton's `thoth' operating system didn't keep this
distinction.
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:32:24 +, Steve Simon wrote:
I don't know if f2c meets your needs, but it has always worked.
As compared to modern fortran compilers, it is basically a toy.
But he did say some of his source is in ratfor,
I am pretty sure f2c would be happy with ratfor's output.
Eric Van Hensbergen eri...@gmail.com writes:
build an experimental OS around it! But if you go this path,
do consider providing a few more datatypes in the filesystem
(integers, file-id, strings, ...). Basically persistent data
types. Or just use an object or relational database as your
try asking his jail warden.
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:24 PM, smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
/me wonders what ever happened to Hans...
me wonders what ever happened to Hans...
Is that really necessary? I'm guessing it was intended as a joke.
Back in the 10th grade I spent a few months running a Reiser4 linux
root. It was kind of a piece of junk, frequently locking up and
giving inconsistent performance. C.f.
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:42:39 +
smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
There's no way that I know of to possibly interperet a path ending in
/ as a file (with the exception of reading raw Dir data, as on Plan
9 or cat / on, what was it, Solaris?).
FreeBSD 8.0 lets you cat the raw data of a
FreeBSD 8.0 lets you cat the raw data of a directory, and I would
expect the other free BSDs to have that misfeature, too.
i don't see how allowing this is a misfeature. regardless,
plan 9 allows it.
; sha1sum /adm/timezone
05d16cd216a58fae746ae36f72c784d10bcc1392
- erik
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 20:49:17 -0500
erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
FreeBSD 8.0 lets you cat the raw data of a directory, and I would
expect the other free BSDs to have that misfeature, too.
i don't see how allowing this is a misfeature. regardless,
plan 9 allows it.
;
On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:30 PM, Robert Ransom rransom.8...@gmail.com wrote:
This feature might be more useful if the directory entries were
presented to clients of the FS in a textual format, but that would
encourage, if not require, far more parsing in the system, and that is
bad both
did i hear cloud-backed directory entries?
This feature might be more useful if the directory entries
were presented to clients of the FS in a textual format, but that
would encourage, if not require, far more parsing in the system, and
that is bad both for performance and for security.
Sounds like a good argument for
$ size /usr/local/bin/clang
text data bss dec hex filename
22842862 1023204 69200 23935266 16d3922 /usr/local/bin/clang
It is interesting to note the 5 minutes reduction in system time. I
assume that this is in part because of the builtin assembler.
--
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 15:33:57 EST erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
I must also say llvm has a lot of functionality. But even so
there is a lot of bloat. Let me just say the bloat is due to
many factors but it has far *less* to do with graphs.
Download llvm and take a peek. I
64 matches
Mail list logo
