Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Sep 2007 21:26 UTC, submitted by Chris Lattner
Thread beginning with comment 275572
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-08-22
I think the cost of writing compiler backends would be insignificant compared to the cost of developing new chips. Do you have reasons to believe the contrary?
It depends on what you're trying to do.
If you're trying to create a clockless chip, I'm sure the chip development is far more expensive than the compiler development.
But look at the Itanium. It's a chip with a lot of theoretical performance. Getting that improvement requires vastly more work from compilers than on other architectures. No one has really managed to make the chip shine yet.