From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Defending GCC considered futile Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:54:37 +0200 Message-ID: <83386c75iq.fsf@gnu.org> 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> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423673713 13063 80.91.229.3 (11 Feb 2015 16:55:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, perry@piermont.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 11 17:55:04 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 1YLaZ4-0005SE-QJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 17:55:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45996 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLaZ3-0008E3-88 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:55:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38856) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLaYz-0008Ds-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:54:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLaYy-00053I-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:54:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:42532) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLaYu-00051b-CF; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:54:52 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NJM00I009K70I00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:54:50 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NJM00HJT9NBOIB0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:54:50 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <834mqs75z7.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:182908 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:44:44 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:29:41 -0500 > > From: "Perry E. Metzger" > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > > On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:14:17 +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.