[M3devel] INTEGER vs. LONGINT vs. Target.Int in m3cg?

[Jay K]

Really? What technique was employed?
The current system doesn't work as I want. As most other compilers now do.
You mean maybe the .mc files were saved, copied, and cm3cg run on Alpha?
Right. In the past gcc didn't have such good cross building capabilities.
So that might have helped.
Now it does. Now cm3cg has no problem crossing arbitrarily.
But the cm3 frontend does.
A 32bit cm3 frontend can't handle sizes larger than 4GB.


 - Jay

----------------------------------------
> From: dragisha at m3w.org
> To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 13:24:29 +0200
> CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> Subject: Re: [M3devel] INTEGER vs. LONGINT vs. Target.Int in m3cg?
>
> I went this route a decade or so ago... When I was porting pm3 to
> Linux/ALPHA... John Polstra employed same technique later for ezm3...
>
> Standard bootstrap process splits build process at assembly level. For
> Windows it is split at object code level.
>
> What I did was to split it ad GCC "IR" level. that way, 32->64 bit
> crosscompiler was never required.
>
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 11:14 +0000, Jay K wrote:
> > So..we can't fully cross build a 64bit target from a 32bit host
> > because some code
> > wants to declare arrays that fill memory, like so that indexing them
> > never fails
> > an overflow check:
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Dragiša Durić 
>