> * compile time rather than runtime portability
> * lack of dynamic modifications of the runtime
not to be too contrary, but i'm not sure that these two things
are all that safe, in the security sense that i'd like for, say, a
kernel to be safe. perhaps i'm misunderstanding what they imply.
s.
On 16/12/2007, terry mcintyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Intel makes compilers for C, C++, and Fortran. As far as I can tell, they do
> not make compilers for Lisp, Haskell, OCaml, or any other higher-level
> languages.
Intel also funds work (directly or indirectly) on the GCC suite, which
com
Intel makes compilers for C, C++, and Fortran. As far as I can tell, they do
not make compilers for Lisp, Haskell, OCaml, or any other higher-level
languages. Intel knows more about how to get the most out of their own chips,
than just about anybody else. Intel compilers are a means to make thei
