[Bf-committers] To John Walton..

Kiernan Holland bf-committers@blender.org
Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:37:30 -0700

>> 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

>> 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..