From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Yates Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 21:51:07 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <87fvn0senq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8761nusb90.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <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> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0118278a7b3d59050c2f3a28 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1420771920 16084 80.91.229.3 (9 Jan 2015 02:52:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 02:52:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: David Kastrup , David Engster , Emacs developers , Stefan Monnier , Eli Zaretskii , "Perry E. Metzger" To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 09 03:51:54 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 1Y9Pfd-0007V5-2D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 03:51:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48931 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9Pfc-0008Hy-1H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:51:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56021) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9PfO-0008Hq-6s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:51:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9PfN-0002QE-21 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:51:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yk0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c07::229]:44802) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y9PfI-0002PQ-KJ; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:51:08 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-yk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 79so2941346ykr.0; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:51:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=XzS0cVooyZMEyX6nPsGJtpYLsjIjuPXvurCIyfyKBIg=; b=ihCfnmyWnKsOG3mY9Z2j3lW5sUVQ3GEMBiOk/176JEgAuqyK+SpHJgmAEKF5omYoTL pO883jq0htRJl0x8HPqgEiJT32pSh2DmhMav4ljDxTavDXrLGoUO8Rg6BjKFea1X4xXI koilwt80TAVNcqNuCHAlcDTJse3LxCA8GYJGbJNZWLXfkFnAnisoLmE5VgGPO5EXzKKs A2snj13Jqf5knNfu3XiHU6BDgoG90DDjKbeKlEDekCuayggjTqneoOYwcth2EVl5jcnC /v/Tmf65gOyTd1nbJ7YHzjQZ044sX0ERRewYU68tQh7gWTKRujRmeYfFXCAofZON5qtk E2kA== X-Received: by 10.236.24.129 with SMTP id x1mr9742339yhx.118.1420771867702; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:51:07 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.170.204.22 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 18:51:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: V-argKY1CW243BvaQdyS0nUZIkc X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4002:c07::229 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:181089 Archived-At: --089e0118278a7b3d59050c2f3a28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: > > > The long term result of all of this may very well be to do exactly the > > opposite of what you want -- to convince compiler researchers that > > LLVM is the only serious platform for their work, > > Why do you say "may very well be"? According to your previous > paragraph, they are already convinced, so there is no way to > make that any worse. > Richard, That almost comes across as you playing intentionally dumb. The paragraph you quote explicitly uses the term 'researchers'. While some compiler and language aware tools research happens in industry surely the largest amount happens in academe. Academic researchers constitute a continually renewing flow with those graduate students who move on into - typically to less 'researchy' - industry roles being replaced by fresh, impressionable talent. Yes, we may be able to little to reshape attitudes of those who have left academe. But are you therefore suggesting that the battle for hearts and minds of potential future researchers is unalterably predetermined and so utterly lost that we should not even try? /john --089e0118278a7b3d59050c2f3a28 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= hu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:=

=C2=A0 > The long term result of all of this may very well be to do exac= tly the
=C2=A0 > opposite of what you want -- to convince compiler researchers t= hat
=C2=A0 > LLVM is the only serious platform for their work,

Why do you say "may very well be"?=C2=A0 According to your previo= us
paragraph, they are already convinced, so there is no way to
make that any worse.

Richard,

That almost comes across as you playing intentionally dumb.= =C2=A0 The paragraph you quote explicitly uses the term 'researchers= 9;.=C2=A0 While some compiler and language aware tools research happens in = industry surely the largest amount happens in academe.=C2=A0 Academic resea= rchers constitute a continually renewing flow with those graduate students = who move on into - typically to less 'researchy' - industry roles b= eing replaced by fresh, impressionable talent.

Yes= , we may be able to little to reshape attitudes of those who have left acad= eme.=C2=A0 But are you therefore suggesting that the battle for hearts and = minds of potential future researchers is unalterably predetermined and so u= tterly lost that we should not even try?

/john

--089e0118278a7b3d59050c2f3a28--