Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com> writes:

> For example, could the GPL's gfortran frontend and libraries be used
> with a non-free backend?

That is easy to answer for the frontend, and the answer is no.

Actually, there is one way that it could happen.  You would handle
gfortran as a separate project, with separate copyright assignment
forms.  You would track down everybody who has made a significant
contribution (more than ten lines) to the current gfortran code, and
get them to sign a new copyright assignment (I have no idea how many
people this is).  You would re-release gfortran under new terms,
basically some sort of ``GPL-with-exception'' license.  You would
convince the gcc steering committee to accept this state of affairs.
I mention this possibility for the sake of completeness.  I doubt it
would ever come to pass.

To me, even the goal of using the gfortran frontend with a non-free
backend sounds misguided.  To me, it sounds simpler to just write a
new frontend.  I mean, we're talking about FORTRAN here, not C++; I
would expect that all the interesting stuff in FORTRAN would come in
the middle and back ends.  But I say this without actually looking at
the gfortran frontend.

As far as the libraries go, they seem to be under the LGPL, so they
can be used with non-free software under certain restrictions.
Actually, that may be a problem for gfortran acceptance, since the
libraries do not appear to have a libgcc exception, which probably
makes it difficult to use gfortran to produce a proprietary product.
Usually gcc libraries use the libgcc exception to make the compiler
more widely usable.

Also, some of the library files appear to specify the GPL instead of
the LGPL, which again makes them harder to use.

Ian