Re: Source-to-Source compilers?

Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez <rnsanchez@wait4.org>
Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:36:54 -0700

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Source-to-Source compilers? motonacciu@gmail.com (Simone Pellegrini) (2009-01-16)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2009-01-17)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? idbaxter@semdesigns.com (2009-01-16)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? rnsanchez@wait4.org (Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez) (2009-01-18)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? motonacciu@gmail.com (Simone Pellegrini) (2009-01-19)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? motonacciu@gmail.com (Simone Pellegrini) (2009-01-19)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? motonacciu@gmail.com (Simone Pellegrini) (2009-01-19)
Re: Source-to-Source compilers? serge.guelton@irisa.fr (serge guelton) (2009-01-20)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez <rnsanchez@wait4.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:36:54 -0700
Organization: SYS_WAIT4
Keywords: parallel, tools
Posted-Date: 18 Jan 2009 08:06:42 EST

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:18:06 -0800, Simone Pellegrini wrote:


> So, what else? GCC? Open64? I've heard that it is very painful to work
> with these tools and we have not years to spent just trying to
> understand how the tool work. Can you suggest something else? Anyone of
> you have experience with some of the tools I've mentioned? Is it really
> possible that in 2009 this is the most the world has to offer?


How about Cetus?


http://cetus.ecn.purdue.edu


Regards.


--
Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez http://rnsanchez.wait4.org/
    "Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse."


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.