This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] type safe trees
- From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: drow at false dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 16:20:41 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC] type safe trees
- Organization: CodeSourcery LLC
- References: <10406251504.AA10288@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Richard Kenner wrote:
But the support for cross compiling doesn't help your argument at all;
I don't understand what your point is here.
I don't see the cross-compiling issue as relevant. *At some point*, if
you are building a system meant for development, you have to take the
bootstrap step and when you do, any complexity will make things more
difficult.
Are you seriously saying that by the time you've got a cross toolchain,
target libraries and target os running testsuites on a simulator that
the complexity of pressing the self-hosting button for a compiler written
in C++ would be harder than fixing a few bugs that you'd have to fix
*anyway*? Heck, at that point you've got a cross toolchain that should
produce the exact same binaries as your self-hosted compiler -- that's
a simple way of detecting if there's a bug in your self-hosted system.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk