Re: clang vs free software

[Helmut Eller]

On Thu, Jan 23 2014, David Kastrup wrote:

> Which brings us back to the question: what would be required to provide
> them via GCC or other GNU software?

GCC should have some analog to libclang:
  http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/group__CINDEX.html
i.e. a somewhat stable API that makes the AST available without exposing
too many internal details.

Maybe that is possible with a GCC plugin, but since GCC could have
offered such functionality since decades, it's likely that it was
prevented for some political reason (like "you could then use GCC's
front-end for a proprietary IDE").

> If nobody bothers with even
> considering the question, it would appear that it is not all that
> important...

Maybe nobody bothers because using clang is easier than to fight with
FSF policies.

Helmut