This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Converting the gcc backend to a library?
- To: Edward Jason Riedy <ejr at CS dot Berkeley dot EDU>
- Subject: Re: Converting the gcc backend to a library?
- From: David Starner <dvdeug at x8b4e53cd dot dhcp dot okstate dot edu>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 16:14:19 -0600
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <10663.947479149@upchuck> <200001102200.OAA09274@lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
- Reply-To: dstarner98 at aasaa dot ofe dot org
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 02:00:11PM -0800, Edward Jason Riedy wrote:
> Um, am I the only one who's seen an obviously gcc executable (the main()
> called when you run gcc) connected to a frontend derived from an Edison
> Group frontend and an proprietary backend that happens to have many of
> the same variable dependency bugs as that version gcc?
Possibly. If the FSF knew about it, they would be all over them. I'm sure
the FSF would appreciate you mentioning it to them.
> In other words, this already happens. And it didn't seem terribly
> complicated, although I obviously didn't have the source.
Sure, but that's clearly illegal. The current method would blur the lines
between legal and illegal.
> However, dynamic compilation itself raises some fun licensing points.
Check out gnu.misc.discuss for more detail. However, it's generally
understand that the license of the interpreter wrt the license of the
interpreted code is irrelevant, unless you binary dump it or something.
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
This message property of the Secret Masters. Unauthorized
duplication or reading will result in execution. Aren't
you glad nothing happens without the authorization of
the Secret Masters?