Re: Python and Flaming Thunder

[Jean-Paul Calderone]

On Wed, 14 May 2008 06:53:02 -0400, "J. Clifford Dyer" <jcd@sdf.lonest ar.orgwrote:

>On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 10:33 -0700, Dave Parker wrote:

You sound like a commercial.

>>
>Get Flaming Thunder for only $19.95! It slices, it dices!
>>

And while programs and libraries written in assembly may be twice as fast
as programs and libraries written in C, ...

>>
>It's a myth that they're only twice as fast. An experienced assembly
>language programmer can usually get out at least a factor of 5 by
>using tricks such as cache-coherence, carry flag tricks, stack
>manipulation s, etc.
>>

... they're real hell to maintain.

>>
>That's also a myth. For example, if C is easy to maintain, why is
>Flaming Thunder the only single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross compiler in
>the world? There should be lots of single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>compilers written in C, if C is easier to maintain.

>
>Not only is it the world's only "single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>compiler," but according to google, it's also the world's only "shotgun
>cross compiler" period. But I guess if you make up your own terminology
>you're bound to be unique. :) Do you mind if I ask: what exactly is a
>single-asset 8x8 shotgun cross compiler, and what makes that of any
>value to me?

The web page explains. It's a compiler that runs on 8 platforms and can
generate executables for any of them on any of them. It's not _totally_
clear about what "single-asset" means, but it gives the impression (and
the term somewhat suggests) that this means there's a single executable
that does all of this (compare to gcc's design, where support for cross
compiling to another arch is provided by a separate executable).

"Shotgun" probably just sounds cool.

Jean-Paul

[Diez B. Roggisch]

Re: Python and Flaming Thunder

>>That's also a myth. For example, if C is easy to maintain, why is

>>Flaming Thunder the only single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross compiler in
>>the world? There should be lots of single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>>compilers written in C, if C is easier to maintain.

>>Not only is it the world's only "single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>>compiler," but according to google, it's also the world's only "shotgun
>>cross compiler" period. But I guess if you make up your own terminology
>>you're bound to be unique. :) Do you mind if I ask: what exactly is a
>>single-asset 8x8 shotgun cross compiler, and what makes that of any
>>value to me?

>
The web page explains. It's a compiler that runs on 8 platforms and can
generate executables for any of them on any of them. It's not _totally_
clear about what "single-asset" means, but it gives the impression (and
the term somewhat suggests) that this means there's a single executable
that does all of this (compare to gcc's design, where support for cross
compiling to another arch is provided by a separate executable).

Which isn't too hard if all you have are simple datatypes as a handfull
numerical types + strings.

Besides, from what I see, the supported platforms all are x86, 32bit &
64bit. And I bet GCC works pretty unmodified amongst these as well - only
binary formats differ. But let Flaming Thunder grow a library system with
dynamic loading, and I wonder how well his crosscompiler works..



Diez

[castironpi@gmail.com]

Re: Python and Flaming Thunder

On May 14, 8:43 am, "Diez B. Roggisch" <de...@nospam.w eb.dewrote:

>That's also a myth.  For example, if C is easy to maintain, why is
>Flaming Thunder the only single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross compiler in
>the world?  There should be lots of single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>compilers written in C, if C is easier to maintain.
>Not only is it the world's only "single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross
>compiler," but according to google, it's also the world's only "shotgun
>cross compiler" period.  But I guess if you make up your own terminology
>you're bound to be unique.  :)  Do you mind if I ask: what exactly is a
>single-asset 8x8 shotgun cross compiler, and what makes that of any
>value to me?

>

The web page explains.  It's a compiler that runs on 8 platforms and can
generate executables for any of them on any of them.  It's not _totally_
clear about what "single-asset" means, but it gives the impression (and
the term somewhat suggests) that this means there's a single executable
that does all of this (compare to gcc's design, where support for cross
compiling to another arch is provided by a separate executable).

>
Which isn't too hard if all you have are simple datatypes as a handfull
numerical types + strings.
>
Besides, from what I see, the supported platforms all are x86, 32bit &
64bit. And I bet GCC works pretty unmodified amongst these as well - only
binary formats differ. But let Flaming Thunder grow a library system with
dynamic loading, and I wonder how well his crosscompiler works..
>
Diez- Hide quoted text -
>
- Show quoted text -

8x8 is pretty easy to aim for. Turn on 16x16, and you're the laptop
to stand on. FxF?