From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 11:33:22 -0400 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] reviving a bit of WWB In-Reply-To: References: <20200920230057.C5D1A4422E@lignose.oclsc.org> Message-ID: Moving to COFF On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:56 PM John Cowan wrote: > Rereading that made me wonder: if someone retargeted an old compiler (pcc, > say) to produce i386 code, > I thought SVR3's was PCC (maybe PCC2). But I thought I remember that is had a i386 code. Certainly by SVR4 time. IIRC, the time frame of SVR3's front end would have been original ANSI (i.e. White Book V2). > how much faster would it run than a VAX? > In the time frame of the SVR3 (mid/late 80s), the Intel processors was faster than the 1MIP (780 circa 1977) in raw computes. The issue was always I/O. Most PC did not have the same amount of I/O HW that much earlier Vaxen. > I see that there is a pcc derivative at , but > supposedly it has been heavily rewritten for C99 compliance and other > things. > And my point is that by the time of C99, it was a different language than the early 1970s when Dennis created fit or the original PDP-11/20 he and Ken used for the first UNIX kernel and tools implementations. "When I read commentary about suggestions for where C should go, I often think back and give thanks that it wasn't developed under the advice of a worldwide crowd." dmr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: