[fpc-devel]Re: Latest status

[Florian Klaempfl]

At 23:58 27.11.01 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> > I know all this discussions but here I see the iA64 from the view
> > of the compiler designer :) and here the iA64 is brilliant. But I don't 
> think
> > that the iA64 will be important the next years, but it will get interesting
> > when the transistor count of processors reaches 10^9 to 10^10. Having 
> SMT _and_
> > the variable VLIW concept of the iA64 will be probably the only the 
> solution
> > to use a lot of execution units ...
> >
> > Regarding x86-64: It sounds interesting but I can't believe that AMD has
> > the power to introduce it into the market.
>
>I don't think so, because the marked for for 64-bit consumer PCs is
>empty.
>
>The IA64 is a very good design. But it is so complex, that the CPUs will
>be too expensive for home usage.

For the next five years I agree totally.

 >I'm wondering a little bit that you write the IA64 support first. It's a
>totally new design. For using the full potential a good optimization is
>required. (That means loop analysis, unrolling, ... ) It's a big
>challenge.

Yes I know, that's why I'am interesseted in it :).

But another point is, a x86-64 port can be hacked quite quick together.
The only real problem are the calling conventions. I'll play around
with it :), it will prove the portability of the new fpc back end
and it will surely improve the 64 bit awareness. If something happens,
you'll see it in the cvs.


>Concerning optimization, I'm not a compiler expert, but isn't it
>possible to make the backend compatible to the backend used by Intel
>Fortran and C/C++ Compiler. Replacing the fpc backend by the Intel
>backend would result in a dramatically faster Programs, especially for
>P4 and IA64 in the future. That's just an idea, I'm not a expert.

Theoretically yes, but is it possible to access the intel back end? I.e. is
the interface documented?