[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Marco Manfredini
Subject: [DotGNU]gcc?
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 07:31:55 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20010801

Rhys Weatherley wrote:

> This would allow proprietary language implementors to
> get around the GPL on the RTL code.  They could write
> a very simple language->IL convertor, and then use the
> super-assembler to do all of the hard native translation
> work for them.  And the big bonus to them is that they
> don't need to GPL their front-end: it's just generating a
> text stream to a widely published format.
I don't quite get it. Why is that different from a proprietary language
implementor who generates one of the supported languages and feeds this
into gcc?

This would only make a sense to me, if one can expect that

p.i.l -> IL -> native

produces a -significant- better result that

p.i.l -> "C/C++/Fortran" -> IL -> native

Which looks unlikely to me, since it is the task of the opmtimizer to
cook its input until it contains not more than the neccesary, no matter
was the input was.

[Btw. I hit "reply" to Rhys' message, which put rhys Email into the recipient field & I didn't realize that and send him the message exclusively. Now I've set the reply-to for this msg, but couldn't this be made by the mailing-list software? I find this distracting, because all other lists I'm on set the reply-to field]


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]