5 ms·
Wasn't LLVM reinventing the wheel at the time? They could just collaborate to GCC.
by marcos100 5y ago
Wasn't LLVM reinventing the wheel at the time? They could just collaborate to GCC.
- _flux 5y agoMaybe if GCC project wasn't opposing the ability to easily integrate third-party tools we wouldn't have LLVM to begin with.
- ch_123 5y agoThey wanted to, but RMS wasn't interested at that time: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg00594.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg00... I have also been told by more than one person that does professional compiler development that GCC's codebase is very difficult to work with. At least some commentary I've read suggests that this was a deliberate choice on the part of the GNU project.
- kps 5y ago> I have also been told by more than one person that does professional compiler development that GCC's codebase is very difficult to work with. Add another. (Now-former professional compiler developer.) > At least some commentary I've read suggests that this was a deliberate choice on the part of the GNU project. This is the ‘RMS loophole’ in the GPL. In theory you can do what you want with the source; in practice you need help from the insiders.
- marcos100 5y agoSure, I'm not denying any problems with the GCC codebase and/or how RMS handles GNU software. Just pointing that reinventing the wheel is not necessarily a bad thing or a waste of time.