From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3238 invoked by alias); 31 Dec 2002 00:59:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3230 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:59:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net) (194.217.242.90) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:59:55 -0000 Received: from wgold.demon.co.uk ([158.152.96.124] helo=thor) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18TAku-000BA6-0W for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:59:40 +0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 by thor ([127.0.0.1] running VPOP3) with SMTP for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:32:19 -0000 From: "James Mansion" To: Subject: RE: An unusual Performance approach using Synthetic registers Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:58:00 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Server: VPOP3 V1.5.0b - Registered X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01609.txt.bz2 > application programming in assembler, I found 16 general purpose registers > not to be enough. I suspect, however, that this was because you wanted to avoid *coding* spill logic for registers that were reused infrequently. That's different for avoiding spills for *material* performance reasons, and a compiler isn't as lazy as you (or I). James