From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Perry E. Metzger" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:51:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20150108195148.25cf82ff@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> References: <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <87vbkovhh7.fsf@engster.org> <87387rvobr.fsf@engster.org> <83ppat84hk.fsf@gnu.org> <20150106143933.0090bc83@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <83r3v77ij6.fsf@gnu.org> <20150106154539.3d0752c4@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87wq4ype3z.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20150108083211.5a85a077@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <877fwxpb63.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83r3v55me9.fsf@gnu.org> <87wq4xqnlr.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ppap5jp7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1420764765 12626 80.91.229.3 (9 Jan 2015 00:52:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 00:52:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 09 01:52:40 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9No4-0004Yw-La for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 01:52:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48724 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9No4-0006Mu-4E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:52:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38635) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9Nnr-0006Mo-Kw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:51:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9Nnq-0001ub-Nu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:51:51 -0500 Original-Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com ([2001:470:30:84:e276:63ff:fe62:3400]:44302) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9Nnp-0001uI-7K; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:51:49 -0500 Original-Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CD884; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:51:48 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from jabberwock.cb.piermont.com (jabberwock.cb.piermont.com [10.160.2.107]) by snark.cb.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824AE2DEA03; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:51:48 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.10.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 2001:470:30:84:e276:63ff:fe62:3400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:181085 Archived-At: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:02:13 -0500 Richard Stallman wrote: > > E.g., if it turns out that we > > need 99% of what is already in the AST, the argument for using > > it will be much more substantiated. > > For me, the concern is rather, what IS in the AST that we DON'T > need. I am sad to say that I can't think of something the compiler might know that would not, at least some of the time, be very valuable to an IDE to know as well. I say I am sad because it would be much simpler to have this discussion otherwise. We live in an era where people expect, more and more, to be able to perform substantial source code to source code transformations using programs. To restrict access to the AST is to declare that some such transformations are to be impossible. I recognize that you fear the use of GCC in proprietary systems, and I recognize that this is a serious problem and legitimate concern. I agree that it would be vastly preferable to get what programmers need without opening up GCC this way. However, as with the need to allow proprietary software to use GNU libc and to allow proprietary software to run on GNU/Linux even though it would be nicer to live in a world where that was not a practical requirement, it is, de facto, likely to be necessary to allow such breeches for the greater good of the free software movement. In any case, LLVM will end up becoming the tool of choice for all compiler writers -- has already, in fact, as I've said I've got little choice about using it since GCC does not have the hooks into the AST I need for my own compiler work -- and the question of GCC's large share of the market will become impossible to defend anyway. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com