From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA27004 for caml-redistribution; Sat, 29 Aug 1998 18:43:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA02004 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 07:18:02 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from camel14.mindspring.com (camel14.mindspring.com [207.69.200.64]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06558 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 07:17:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from reflections.eng.mindspring.net (reflections.eng.mindspring.net [207.69.192.100]) by camel14.mindspring.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA31387 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 01:17:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 01:18:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Todd Graham Lewis X-Sender: tlewis@reflections.eng.mindspring.net To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: VLIW & caml: how? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: weis I've been reading that VLIW as implemented on the IA-64/Merced will post problems for conventional compilers such as gcc which don't have a very expansive view of the code they're compiling. How well will o'caml deal with optimizing for this sort of architecture? Any thoughts? -- Todd Graham Lewis 32°49'N,83°36'W (800) 719-4664, x2804 ******Linux****** MindSpring Enterprises tlewis@mindspring.net