Hi,

Hubert Feyrer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Anders Magnusson wrote:
>> I have (as some people may know) been hacking on pcc for fun for some 
>> years.
>
> Tres cool! A few questions that I've seen people ask or that I 
> wondered myself:
>  * this is only C, no C++, right?
Right.
>  * This is i386-only right now, right?
 From a useable perspective, yes.  Note that there are 6 archs in the 
source tree,
and vax and mips are probably quite easy to get going.  But I have focused
on x86 lately just to get something done :-)
>  * do you have any numbers on performance of both the compiler, and the
>    compiled code? For example, how long does it take if you use PCC to
>    do a "build.sh release", instead of using GCC)?
build.sh is a mess if you want to use something other than gcc, at least 
I don't
know how to teach it something else.  But a "traditional" make of the 
sources:

# make USETOOLS=never MKOBJDIRS=no MKSHARE=no MKUPDATE=no NOINCLUDES=no 
NOPIC=yes HAVE_GCC= MKGCC=no MKGDB=no MKPUFFS=no

tested with both compilers take 10 hours with gcc and just over two 
hours with pcc.
This is on my quite slow transmeta-based Sony Vaio.

I have also run some benchmarks, like BYTEbench, and generally the 
performance
is a few percent worse with pcc except when strength reduction could be 
used, then
it is much worse :-)

>  * What license is the code under, exactly? I see some mention of
>    Caldera on your homepage.
>
Caldera has a 4-clause BSD license on the original PCC code, I myself 
use a 3-clause.
Therefore it was added to the web page :-)

-- Ragge