This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: clang and FSF's strategy
- From: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr at thyrsus dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, rms at gnu dot org, emacs-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 23:02:12 -0500
- Subject: Re: clang and FSF's strategy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140121201949 dot 21DE1380522 at snark dot thyrsus dot com> <CAKOQZ8yLgvhijZEj0O3CC6Mt4gEJMUF5Bv_EMVnkWCdQPRJ6RA at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: esr at thyrsus dot com
Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com>:
> I'm sympathetic to our comments regarding GCC vs. clang. But I'm not
> sure I grasp your proposed solution. GCC does support plugins, and
> has supported them for a few releases now.
Then I don't understand why David Kastrup's question was even controversial.
If I have failed to understand the background facts, I apologize and welcome
I hope you (and others) understand that I welcome chances to help the FSF's
projects when I believe doing so serves the hacker community as a whole. The
fact that I am currently working full-time on cleaning up the Emacs repoaitory
for full git conversion is only one instance of this.
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>