Re: 80486 vs. 68040 code size

Article View: comp.arch

Article #20962

#20962

From: Keith Bierman Sun Tactical Engin...
Date: Mon, 01 May 1989 03:29

19 lines
1391 bytes

In article <7952@killer.Dallas.TX.US> elg@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Eric Green) writes:
>
>A possible flaw: I seem to recall that SunOS's old compilers, at
>least, were based on the PCC. The PCC isn't exactly the world's most
>sophisticated compiler. The code it produces is, to put it charitably,
>merely adequate. On the other hand, I suspect that the Xenix compiler
>has been much tweaked by Microsoft's compiler experts....

Well, Sun's compilers haven't exactly stood still. OS 3.4 is quite
old, and the compilers are nowhere close to our current ones (in
terms of robustness, code quality, etc.)

Keith H. Bierman      |*My thoughts are my own. Only my work belongs to Sun*
It's Not My Fault     |	Marketing Technical Specialist 
I Voted for Bill &    |   Languages and Performance Tools. 
Opus            (* strange as it may seem, I do more engineering now     *)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <102029@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!ames!oliveb!sun!fatcity!khb

References: <13699@steinmetz.ge.com> <7952@killer.Dallas.TX.US>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!ames!oliveb!sun!fatcity!khb
From: khb@fatcity.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman Sun Tactical Engineering)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 80486 vs. 68040 code size
Message-ID: <102029@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 1 May 89 03:29:35 GMT
References: <13699@steinmetz.ge.com> <7952@killer.Dallas.TX.US>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: khb@sun.UUCP (Keith Bierman Sun Tactical Engineering)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 19

Reply to Parent Message