<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
> Are either LLVN or gcc-intermediate as well-documented as C--, C, or <br>> C++?<br>> Too bad C-- seems to be somewhat lacking in implementatins of multiple <br>> kinds of hardware. It's otherwise excellent.<br><br><br>gcc-intermediate isn't necessarily poorly documented or changes much,<br>but C and C++ are clearly the better documented forms.<br>Just go to a bookstore.<br><br><br>And even if they weren't better documented, there is much broader<br>experience with them, by me and the wider world.<br><br><br>It's a numbers thing. I have written thousands of lines of C and C++<br>and overall millions or billions have been written.<br><br><br>Most of mine have been compiled by one line of compilers, but not all,<br>and, in reality, I don't believe a backend would use the language(s)<br>very intensely. The main reason I advocate C++ as a target vs. C<br>is for portable efficient exception handling.<br>(As well, Visual C++ I think is closer to the standard in terms<br>of lack of extensions than gcc; I have also compiled some code<br>with its /Za switch that disables extensions.)<br><br><br>I should point out that nested functions will probably pose a small problem.<br>Using "this" in C++ might help some, esp. to get the extra parameter efficiently<br>passed on 32bit x86.<br><br><br> - Jay<br> </body>
</html>