4 ms·
The irony of it is that no one was really interested in making a new frontend. LLVM was meant to be submitted to GNU, but RMS didn't really show interest in the
by qalmakka 6y ago
The irony of it is that no one was really interested in making a new frontend. LLVM was meant to be submitted to GNU, but RMS didn't really show interest in the 00's and instead it rebuffed attempts to disentangle GCC's frontend from the backend, forcing the creation of Clang.
It's arguably true that RMS's zealotry actually backfired spectacularly.
- arp242 6y agorms actually missed the offer to donate LLVM to GNU because of the idiosyncratic way he uses email. See: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg00594.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg00... I think it's probably for the best; having two competing solutions with different priorities is probably a win for everyone, gcc and clang users alike. gcc has improved much in the last few years in part due to LLVM/clang's pressure.