From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76E86BB84 for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 19:33:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca (univmail.CIS.McMaster.CA [130.113.64.46]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k4IHXfJF013309 for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 19:33:42 +0200 Received: from [130.113.68.27] (account carette@univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca [130.113.68.27] verified) by cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 126571176 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Thu, 18 May 2006 13:33:41 -0400 Message-ID: <446CB021.6000009@mcmaster.ca> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:34:25 -0400 From: Jacques Carette Organization: McMaster University User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] compiler bug? References: <20060517231426.30289.qmail@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <446CABCA.8000906@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <446CABCA.8000906@inria.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 446CAFF5.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; compiler:01 bug:01 compiler:01 compilation:01 compilation:01 solver:01 compilers:01 ocamlopt:01 fervent:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 integer:01 jacques:01 jacques:01 linear:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 Xavier Leroy wrote: >Generation of spill code is a dark corner of compiler construction. >As with many other compilation problems, there are a bunch of >NP-completeness results. Unlike many other compilation problems, I'm >not aware of any published heuristics that works well in most cases. >Well, there is the paper by George and Appel where they use an ILP >solver (integer linear programming) to produce optimal spills, but >that's kind of expensive... > > It is my impression that users of compilers are "ready" for the following situation: 1) an optimizing compiler (like ocamlopt!) that produces good code efficiently 2) a super-optimizing compiler that produces fantastic code, at whatever cost. Such a compiler would probably rapidly find a niche of fervent users. Jacques