Re: [DotGNU]gcc?

[Keith Poole]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote:

> DotGNU is a GNU package.  GCC is a GNU package.  As GNU packages, we
> have an obligation to work together and support each other's projects if
> it's accommodating.
>
> Basically, if GCC can be made to compile to IL and Java bytecode, it
> makes it easier for integrate our components with the rest of the GNU
> system.  Also, we can use other parts of GCC to do things that could
> otherwise benefit the performance of the runtime.  Basically, if we work
> with GCC, we don't do redundant work.  However, I suggest reading the
> portable.Net FAQ at 
> http://www.southern-storm.com.au/pnet_faq.html ...
>
> The FAQ gives a decent primer to the problems with doing a GCC
> conversion.  However, if it can be done - it's a worthy project.
>
> Our status right now is that we can get along without the GCC frontend
> (because of portable.Net) but that it would be a strategic win.
>
>         -Barry
>
> Scott Lanham wrote:
>
> > How does gcc not being modified to compile to IL and JavaVM (other than java)
> > affect DotGNU?
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
There is an alternative, the virtual machine in .NET compiles the IL 
into native machine code, so why couldn't the .GNU virtual machine use 
the gcc back-end to convert the IL?  This would give the advantage of 
the good code generation of gcc, provide code generation for a host of 
machines in one go, and allow toold such as gdb, to be used to debug 
applications.  So the sequence of events to run a program is:

1.  Write the code
2.  Compile into IL using the .GNU compiler
3.  Start execution
4.  The virtual machine converts the IL into RTL (Register Transfer 
Language), passes it to the gcc back-end and produces machine code.
5.  The produced code executes,

Any problems?

               Keith