[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject)
From: |
Rob Landley |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject) |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Sep 2006 17:09:44 -0400 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
On Friday 08 September 2006 11:44 am, Mike B wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I wasnt worried about the compiled output, altho a big issue. What im more
> interested in is the speed in which it compiles. I think it would have a
> great reception from the likes of Gentoo and others. Maybe that would boost
> its appeal and manpower =)
I'm looking for a small, simple, understandable compiler that can run quickly
in a small amount of memory.
gcc 4.x takes something like 300 megabytes of memory to rebuild itself.
There's no _way_ you can self-host it on a small embedded system like a
zaurus. Even if you gave it a microdrive or something to swap to, it would
take days.
> Mike
Rob
--
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), (continued)
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Johannes Klarenbeek, 2006/09/08
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Daniel Glöckner, 2006/09/08
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Dave Dodge, 2006/09/11
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Rob Landley, 2006/09/12
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Dave Dodge, 2006/09/13
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Guillaume POIRIER, 2006/09/13
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Dave Dodge, 2006/09/13
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Rob Landley, 2006/09/13
Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Philippe Ribet, 2006/09/10
[Tinycc-devel] (no subject), Mike B, 2006/09/08
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] (no subject),
Rob Landley <=