From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2015 00:04:13 +0100 Message-ID: <877fvtwcgi.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87mw4rxkzv.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423350267 31128 80.91.229.3 (7 Feb 2015 23:04:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:04:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , slewsys@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 08 00:04:27 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 1YKEQM-0007E3-Q6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2015 00:04:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54872 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKEQM-0002ve-7D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 18:04:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKEQI-0002r0-CK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 18:04:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKEQH-0007Ao-DO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 18:04:22 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:49959) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKEQH-0007Ak-AR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 18:04:21 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57134 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKEQ9-0001BE-QL; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 18:04:14 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5D037E0A88; Sun, 8 Feb 2015 00:04:13 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:40:17 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:182622 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] > [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] > [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > > LLVM is not meant to kill GCC > > More precisely, Apple intends LLVM and Clang to make GCC cease to be a > signal success and a reason for all sorts of companies to work on a > compiler that always gives users freedom. That would be a victory for > Apple and a defeat for freedom. As far as I can see, Apple does not _control_ LLVM/Clang development like they do with Darwin. Instead there is a multi-party coalition of interested and independent parties working on it. The continued success of LLVM/Clang, particularly in the academics, depends on this constellation to continue to a significant degree. So I don't see it as a defeat but rather as a win for software freedom as a governing principle. The bad side is the possibility of proprietary off-spins, and that's not just a theoretical consideration but an actively used one (for GPU programming). So it is a loss for copyleft. I don't really see it as a "victory" for Apple as they had to cede control to a community in order to have the project take flight. This is different to their way of treating people interested in working on Darwin, their free software kernel, like second-class rabble getting thrown scraps. But while I would not call it a "victory", it definitely is a form of success. As long as the price they feel they have to pay for their success is actually enabling a free software project based on a prospering community (even if not copylefted), we are doing something right. I=A0don't see the point in taking the pressure off them by committing a complex form of suicide, stopping GNU programs from interacting well in the hope to stop people from using them in connection with LLVM. > I don't know what LLDB is, or what it might do. I am going to find > out. Well, judging from this thread being about basic gud.el support for LLDB, chances are that it is a debugger. --=20 David Kastrup