[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: clang vs free software

From: John Yates
Subject: Re: clang vs free software
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:34:01 -0500

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:
    Fine, but what's the policy now regarding features that require an
    installed clang to work; can they be merged to Emacs proper or not?

Emacs (and all GNU packages involving C code) should be designed to
work best with GCC.  There should be nothing to encourage users not to
use our compiler.


That really does not answer David's question.  If you read it carefully he called out "features that require an installed clang to work".  That is the crux of the tension here.  While the most obvious manifestation of clang is as a C/C++ compiler very similar to gcc it is also much more.  That is because it is architected as suite of libraries intended to be integrated into more environments than just a compiler:


Tooling for analyzing and manipulating C/C++ is simply a space that gcc is not addressing.  Based on its architecture it likely never will.

There exist now various packages integrating emacs will elements of clang.  These packages are not supporting clang as alternative compiler.  Rather by exploiting clang interfaces that have no gcc analog they offer exciting IDE-like features.


reply via email to

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