From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: clang/emacs/ecb/semantic Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:00 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20940A983D814C6192ABFF2B7A269A88@gmail.com> <87wqx42nag.fsf@yandex.ru> <87ehjcrw70.fsf@engster.org> <87hao816w4.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87hao7ioos.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87zk1yhib2.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87y5hg3jv1.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1354492933 26335 80.91.229.3 (3 Dec 2012 00:02:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 00:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: pjb@informatimago.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 03 01:02:23 2012 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 1TfJUI-0004SU-5I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 01:02:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38699 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TfJU6-0004O7-FA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:06 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33150) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TfJU4-0004O1-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TfJU2-0007FI-L6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:04 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39255) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TfJU2-0007FE-I2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:02 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TfJU0-0004aA-Oy; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:02:00 -0500 In-reply-to: <87y5hg3jv1.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:155182 Archived-At: > Part of the reason why clang/llvm weakens our commnity, compared > with GCC, is that the clang front ends can feed their data to > nonfree tools. Is that true, though? GCC can produce not only GIMPLE trees but also various forms of annotated RTL and dump them to files. What I am concerned about is _back ends_. I'm sorry if this was not sufficiently clear in that once sentence, but I did say it explicitly before. GCC RTL dumps are not sufficient to serve as input to a back end. You can't feed them into a nonfree back end. I have never heard of GIMPLE trees. I hope that they are not suitable for fueling a nonfree back end. Ie, people can write non-free assemblers that use the assembly output of GCC, people can write non-free compilers that target the gas assembly language, and so on, all in conformance with the letter of the GPL. That it is a different issue. The issue here is combining free front-ends with nonfree back-ends, and vice versa. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call