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: Defending GCC considered futile Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:06 -0500 Message-ID: <20150211155006.515c8382@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> References: <20150207202952.1042BC00A6@snark.thyrsus.com> <87wq3rocqb.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20150209172445.290dc20e@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20150211104229.2782cb00@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <837fvo77dy.fsf@gnu.org> <20150211112941.148f783d@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <834mqs75z7.fsf@gnu.org> <83386c75iq.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 1423687828 31307 80.91.229.3 (11 Feb 2015 20:50:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:50:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 11 21:50:24 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 1YLeEo-0004v7-CA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 21:50:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46930 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLeEn-0002p8-QD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55961) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLeEj-0002of-Ec for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:18 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLeEf-0006in-5G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:17 -0500 Original-Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com ([166.84.7.14]:44009) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLeEa-0006hj-Bz; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:08 -0500 Original-Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9426659; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:07 -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 422352DEF0A; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:50:07 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83386c75iq.fsf@gnu.org> 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: 166.84.7.14 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:182917 Archived-At: On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:54:37 +0200 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Modularizing GCC is not discouraged. It actually happens as > > > > we speak, check out the latest developments in GCC 5 and GDB. > > > > > > If this is the case, what is the problem with Emacs directly > > > linking against the GCC front end to get access to the C and > > > C++ AST? > > > > I don't know, you tell me. > > Btw, I don't really know what you mean by "front end" above, but if > you think the modularization of GCC means separating the back-end, > i.e. the part that is target-dependent, then that's not what how > it's done in this case. There's more than one way to make a > compiler modular and easy to use by other programs. I mostly just meant "getting API access to the part that parses things and generates an AST", nothing about GCC's architecture in particular was implied. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com