[Bf-committers] To John Walton..

[Kiernan Holland]

>> 
>> It might require that code that is specific to Irix be seperated out
>> and made as a linkable library, and then to have special calls to that
>> specific code from within the GCC compiled portions.. Any build that
>> prefers a proprietary build over a non-proprietary one will have lots
>> of problems across the board..
> 
>the point is to avoid code that locks you into gcc compiler,
>since gcc code does not perform as well as mipspro. having a build 
>system that has problems across the board also includes non-proprietary 
>ones too. 
> 
>it's perfectly reasonable to have code that compiles on all platforms.
>it's why we got to where we are today.
>

So you are asking "Is it possible to abstract the source from being 
specific to any compiler and still be fair to compile with GCC and
mipspro?" 

>> If you want to compile blender to be able to run on a multi-processor
>> cluster of some sort that would probably call for a different beast,
>> blender broken up into modules that talk to each other, for instance.
> 
>run.. yeah. compile. nah. 

That's a little vague.. What do you mean?

>from what i've seen it's always simple code issues that the irix compiler
>is more stringent in reporting. and since you don't have an sgi compiler
>you don't have any thing base your assertion on anyway.

Okay.. I don't but neither do many others.. 

I was under the assumption that it was a problem with the SGI compiler and 
not the GCC.. Evidently its about the specificness of the code to work with
GCC ??

>in anycase, this POINT is to be able to use sgi's CASE tools to find
>performance problems in the code that benefits eveyont not carve
>out a SGI only hole to. If I wanted to do that i could just fork it.

That's reasonable..