bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) (11/07/88)
Just a quick question ... Is anyone out there looking at porting Gnu Ghostscript to the Amy?? I was looking at it ( mostly just the docs, not the code - time, time time ) on the weekend and think it might be useful. I don't have any time in the next couple of months and wouldn't want to duplicate efforts. Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? Inquiring minds want to know! :-) Blair -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= = Blair MacIntyre (bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu) The Guy in Green ... = = "Don't be mean ... remember, no matter where you go, there you are." BBanzai= = "Don't wurry, be habby ..." =
bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) (11/09/88)
bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) writes: > Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? Of course, to run ANY program written by Richard Stallman, you'll need an awful lot of contiguous memory so that the "stack 1000000" command will work...
abbadon@nuchat.UUCP (David Neal) (11/09/88)
In article <0XRmvTy00Uka0TS645@andrew.cmu.edu>, bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) writes: > bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) writes: > > Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? > > Of course, to run ANY program written by Richard Stallman, you'll > need an awful lot of contiguous memory so that the "stack 1000000" > command will work... Absolutely true... this is what convinced me porting gnu cc and gnu cc++ would be a good way to waste a major fraction of my lifespan. I hear GNU has a kernel more or less working (or at least compilable) and it takes many many megs of space to do so. Now of course, so does most kernels these days, SUNOS takes plenty of space, but considering that someone has posted a UNIX (tm) clone that runs in ->32K<- and can run a fair amount of unix software it would follow that with a resonable effort, gcc and gcc++ could be considerably smaller. Beyond this, gcc still depends on YOUR libraries in YOUR compiler, so be prepared to write your own if you wish to distribute an entire compiler that's public domain. Anyone still up for 1) converting gas to spit out proper amiga .o files? 2) converting gld to understand scatter loading and hunks? 3) writing your w own crt.c libraries? Adding all the 'c' library routines? (remember, this thing has to understand launching a task) 4) Buying 4 megs to compile your 'C' compiler in? If so, mail me, any excuse to buy more memory is ok by me! :-) David Neal killer!nuchat!abbadon
dleigh@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM (Darren Leigh) (11/11/88)
In article <9523@watdragon.waterloo.edu> bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu Blair MacIntyre writes: >Is anyone out there looking at porting Gnu Ghostscript to the Amy?? >I was looking at it ( mostly just the docs, not the code - time, time time ) >on the weekend and think it might be useful. > >I don't have any time in the next couple of months and wouldn't want to >duplicate efforts. I'm planning on doing a port. This is the second or third item in my current queue. I've been going through the code and an amy port doesn't look hard at all. >Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? Not me, no way! Stallman wrote those and I don't have enough memory or disk space. :-) Someone else wrote Ghostscript and it is set up to be compiled and run under MS-DOS as well as X11. Memory and disk space are clearly not a problem for us! (Ha ha ha ha . . .) ======== Darren Leigh Internet: dleigh@hplabs.hp.com UUCP: hplabs!dleigh
scott@applix.UUCP (Scott Evernden) (11/11/88)
In article <9523@watdragon.waterloo.edu> bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) writes: > >Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? > I started looking at doing this, but it became quickly apparent that the current set of Amiga C-ompilers cannot handle some of the GCC code without extensive rewrites (eg., macros which expand into thousands of characters). However, I noticed on Compu$erve, in the ATARI-ST sig, that there is a complete port of GCC for the ST (as well as GAS, GAWK, the bin-utils, and other stuff) in Section 12(? - I think). There was no sign of G++, which is no surprise, since it hasn't been officially released by FSF yet. You will need megabytes to even think of using this thing. I can't afford to dload this stuff at $13 per. How badly do you want it?? -scott
bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) (11/14/88)
In article <852@applix.UUCP> scott@applix.UUCP (Scott Evernden) writes: >In article <blat> I wrote >> >>Also, anyone working on GCC or GC++?? >> >I started looking at doing this, but it became quickly apparent that the >current set of Amiga C-ompilers cannot handle some of the GCC code without >extensive rewrites (eg., macros which expand into thousands of characters). > >I can't afford to dload this stuff at $13 per. How badly do you want it?? Not that bad. I was just curious. Besides, I'm taking a compiler writing course next term and, or course, the main project is implementing a compiler. Since everyone knows how _easy_ it is to implement a quality compiler in 4 months, I won't have any more worries after porting it to my Amy ... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AAAaaahhhhhhh ... ( insert lots and lots or :-) - write a good compiler? HA! ) Blair -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= = Blair MacIntyre (bmacintyre@watsol.waterloo.edu) The Guy in Green ... = = "Don't be mean ... remember, no matter where you go, there you are." BBanzai= = "Don't wurry, be habby ..." =