www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - 64 bits..

reply "Dave" <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
Opinions on what priority this (AMD64 code gen.) should have?

Thanks,
- Dave
Mar 11 2005
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Dave wrote:

 Opinions on what priority this (AMD64 code gen.) should have?

I would say that making the language and run-time library 64-bit portable is a very high priority, but that making it actually generate 64-bit code isn't all *that* high... ? I also suggested using the "X86_64" term, instead of AMD64. http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Version (my suggestion for a version(64Bit) was shot down earlier) Beyond X86_64, there is also PPC64 and SPARC64 processors. (mostly for compiling on Apple Mac OS X and on Sun Solaris) Seemed to make sense to have *one* version for all 64 bits ? --anders
Mar 11 2005
next sibling parent reply Dave <Dave_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <d0sbfj$24p9$1 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...
Dave wrote:

 Opinions on what priority this (AMD64 code gen.) should have?

I would say that making the language and run-time library 64-bit portable is a very high priority, but that making it actually generate 64-bit code isn't all *that* high... ? I also suggested using the "X86_64" term, instead of AMD64. http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Version (my suggestion for a version(64Bit) was shot down earlier) Beyond X86_64, there is also PPC64 and SPARC64 processors. (mostly for compiling on Apple Mac OS X and on Sun Solaris) Seemed to make sense to have *one* version for all 64 bits ? --anders

Good points. Quick and dirty estimate of how much work? - Language and lib. (maybe some sort of rough outline) ? - x86_64 code-gen for DMD ? Thanks, - Dave
Mar 11 2005
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Dave wrote:

 Quick and dirty estimate of how much work?

Nope, sorry, although there was some mentioning of things still being left to do in Phobos - with some assumptions of int.sizeof == (void*).sizeof, that breaks on 64-bit. Including void[] going from 8 bytes to 16 bytes, and .length and friends returning size_t instead of int.
 - x86_64 code-gen for DMD ?

I'm not sure, I have only looked at the GDC code-gen... (Since the DMD code generator backend is not Open Source, I'm not sure how anyone but Walter would know this :-)) In a few months time (or something), I will try to get GDC working on a truly PPC64 system. (Don't run one yet, waiting for Tiger release or better fan support in Linux) But I don't really have any AMD64 system myself, and all the Xeons I have access too are running in 32-bit... So with DMD compiler and X86 arch, you're on your own :-) --anders
Mar 11 2005
prev sibling parent reply Paul Bonser <misterpib gmail.com> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:
 Dave wrote:
 
 Opinions on what priority this (AMD64 code gen.) should have?

I would say that making the language and run-time library 64-bit portable is a very high priority, but that making it actually generate 64-bit code isn't all *that* high... ? I also suggested using the "X86_64" term, instead of AMD64. http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Version (my suggestion for a version(64Bit) was shot down earlier) Beyond X86_64, there is also PPC64 and SPARC64 processors. (mostly for compiling on Apple Mac OS X and on Sun Solaris) Seemed to make sense to have *one* version for all 64 bits ? --anders

I'd agree with X86_64, as that is how it is identified in linux, which is the only OS (along with other *NIX variants) that support 64 bits at the moment. I'd be opposed to a singe 64bit version because PPC is big-endian while x86_64 is still little-endian. I have to run dmd (no way I'm using GDC until it catches up...a lot) in a chrooted (plain x86) environment to do my D programming. Which is fine, especially since it will run under the 64-bit stuff just fine, as long as I have 32bit versions of all the libraries I'm using. Still, it's a pain to have to do it like that. -- -PIB -- "C++ also supports the notion of *friends*: cooperative classes that are permitted to see each other's private parts." - Grady Booch
Mar 11 2005
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Paul Bonser wrote:

 I also suggested using the "X86_64" term, instead of AMD64.

I'd agree with X86_64, as that is how it is identified in linux, which is the only OS (along with other *NIX variants) that support 64 bits at the moment.

Not that it *really* matters, since they would probably all form the very same platform for all: 64-bit X86 code (all of processor versions X86_64, AMD64, EM64T that is) It is more about the code target than the actual CPU, though.
 I'd be opposed to a singe 64bit version because PPC is 
 big-endian while x86_64 is still little-endian.

You misunderstood, these would be *extra* versions... So PPC would be like: - PPC - BigEndian - 32Bit And AMD64 would be like: - X86_64 - LittleEndian - 64Bit Currently there are just versions GNU_BitsPerPointer32 and GNU_BitsPerPointer64 for GDC, and AMD64 and X86 for DMD... Having same 32/64 "version" for all D compilers would be good?
 I have to run dmd (no way I'm using GDC until it catches up...a lot)

Yeah, GDC has fallen behind (and it needs a new homepage too) Q: Besides the new features introduced in DMD 0.111 - 0.116, what are the main things that you find missing from GDC 0.10 ? --anders
Mar 11 2005
parent Paul Bonser <misterpib gmail.com> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:
 
 Yeah, GDC has fallen behind (and it needs a new homepage too)
 
 Q: Besides the new features introduced in DMD 0.111 - 0.116,
 what are the main things that you find missing from GDC 0.10 ?
 
 --anders

It seems that a lot of the various libraries don't work in GDC..that'd probably be the main thing. Honestly I've not really looked into it *too* much, but I seem to remember seeing some of the stuff on dsource say it won't compile with GDC, that, and the new features introduced in the recent DMDs... So what could a guy like me, with plenty of programming experience (but no real compiler experience, though I do have a fairly firm understanding of the workings of compilers...), and web design experience do to help a project like GDC along? It seems that the argument some people use for not even trying D (from the GameDev.net forums) is that there's only really one compiler out there..and in a sense they are right. Sure there are 3 (more?) out there...but only one is actually up-to-date. So here's a suggestion, well, rather than suggesting it, I'll just do it: http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?HelpDProgress Please, add things to the page, rearrange the page to look better, whatever...The idea is for the list to be fairly broad, spanning across all sorts of possible things people could do to help. So maybe contact info, and links of course, could be added to help people get in contact with people about helping. :) -- -PIB -- "C++ also supports the notion of *friends*: cooperative classes that are permitted to see each other's private parts." - Grady Booch
Mar 11 2005