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: enabling company-capf support in cfengine.el Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:39:53 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87fvqtg02v.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87y53ghe94.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87vbyk3497.fsf@yandex.ru> <87haa4gw69.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87txe4usm1.fsf@yandex.ru> <87zjnvg2t2.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87txe364q0.fsf@yandex.ru> <87r497fu0h.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87haa1litl.fsf@yandex.ru> <87y53czx7e.fsf@yandex.ru> <87bo08bivm.fsf_-_@flea.lifelogs.com> <87sitkzahs.fsf@yandex.ru> <52D7DAAB.2070709@yandex.ru> <52D81960.2080408@yandex.ru> <52DA8C17.4080707@yandex.ru> <52DC00E5.3020803@yandex.ru> <52DC6A26.3020003@yandex.ru> <87k3dv9z85.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d041826f67ad34704f05dce28 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1390185600 27701 80.91.229.3 (20 Jan 2014 02:40:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 02:40:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers , Stefan Monnier , Dmitry Gutov To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 20 03:40:08 2014 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 1W54mU-0002ml-Hh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 03:40:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48544 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W54mT-0000go-Jy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:40:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45659) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W54mP-0000ff-P7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:40:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W54mO-0003yb-GW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:40:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-we0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::231]:34646) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W54mO-0003yG-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:40:00 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id x55so6475727wes.36 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 18:39:58 -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=UzF7cUj2rLi7w1e/dGQo+NtDuqdYM8rjZI6la2uSBH4=; b=fPODQJe37uC+TqfCkjiVE4zno3qN2vAfZnd0EvG7qUXbMMVJqqyK/f4sj/N1xkAlJh pRsQ/pKunMBHVXs2ukiALNnQW9wngEvEUp/M5JSR7+hHc0Y8kb5Hti9BpOUYZzUIMaym wgNrel5/TdW44RLPNWPJ8WBL5ZHTn50p/tfL/bNyptgYHvOoWDS8j48nDbcBKQi+ALKH gqPHxweCLGOCtQFkdWwOv2Knnun9HFAQ9kMHG2yj/1MVNR9ErDGUXOqwR4GqbEurESvv j7UROK5x+SUxMXk3EdX0MdG9yZfjCsKeaQ+46DbbAoolmRI/kgF2hz9/f5ez1WEptoTx Eu+w== X-Received: by 10.180.104.42 with SMTP id gb10mr7866911wib.51.1390185593621; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 18:39:53 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.194.48.110 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 18:39:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87k3dv9z85.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-Google-Sender-Auth: -Jzpln_K6NqlXqWn2h4rlOZ_0WY X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c03::231 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:168762 Archived-At: --f46d041826f67ad34704f05dce28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > He has no objection to clang (or LLVM) itself, because it *is* free > software. However, the GNU Project sets higher standards, and Emacs > (and GCC) try to conform to them. Specifically, *defending* freedom, > including *shutting the door* on cooperation with non-free software: > > Do you mean, [gcc-xml outputs] the entire parse tree in full > detail? > Would it be conceivable to feed this into a nonfree back-end? > Would this mean that nonfree backends could take advantage > of our free front-ends? > That cat already seems to be out of the bag: http://dragonegg.llvm.org/ If so, it is very dangerous -- it would open the door to a > terrible setback for our defense of users' freedom. Namely, the > use of free software as part of compilers that are partly nonfree. > I don't remember, but I would guess that is why we have refused to > merge it into GCC. > > LLVM and Clang open the door to the same terrible setback. Since > they are not copylefted, their front-ends can be used with nonfree > back-ends and vice versa. [from the cited thread] > > So his objection is to emission of information that could be > conveniently used by non-free software to integrate free software into > a non-free toolchain. AIUI, this is basically the same configuration > that led to the confrontation with Steve Jobs over Objective-C, except > that if the output of the compiler front-end is part of the spec, you > would have almost no leverage in court to claim that it's a single > Work which is a derivative of the copyleft front-end. > RMS may have an inflated sense of the extent to which the greater compiler community (those developing and those using compilers) value gcc over clang / llvm. For many reason the latter is winning the day. Speed, memory footprint, modularity, ease of entry, size of development community all favor clang / llvm. Anecdotal evidence: my startup (Gnu / Linux based product) has just switched from gcc to clang. /john --f46d041826f67ad34704f05dce28 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On S= un, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org&= gt; wrote:

He has no objection to clang (or LLVM) itself, because it *is* free
software. =A0However, the GNU Project sets higher standards, and Emacs
(and GCC) try to conform to them. =A0Specifically, *defending* freedom,
including *shutting the door* on cooperation with non-free software:

=A0 =A0 Do you mean, [gcc-xml outputs] the entire parse tree in full
=A0 =A0 detail?
=A0 =A0 Would it be conceivable to feed this into a nonfree back-end?
=A0 =A0 Would this mean that nonfree backends could take advantage
=A0 =A0 of our free front-ends?

That ca= t already seems to be out of the bag: http://dragonegg.llvm.org/

=A0 =A0 If so, it is very dangerous -- it would open the door to a
=A0 =A0 terrible setback for our defense of users' freedom. =A0Namely, = the
=A0 =A0 use of free software as part of compilers that are partly nonfree.<= br> =A0 =A0 I don't remember, but I would guess that is why we have refused= to
=A0 =A0 merge it into GCC.

=A0 =A0 LLVM and Clang open the door to the same terrible setback. =A0Since=
=A0 =A0 they are not copylefted, their front-ends can be used with nonfree<= br> =A0 =A0 back-ends and vice versa. =A0[from the cited thread]

So his objection is to emission of information that could be
conveniently used by non-free software to integrate free software into
a non-free toolchain. =A0AIUI, this is basically the same configuration
that led to the confrontation with Steve Jobs over Objective-C, except
that if the output of the compiler front-end is part of the spec, you
would have almost no leverage in court to claim that it's a single
Work which is a derivative of the copyleft front-end.
=
RMS may have an inflated sense of the extent to which the gr= eater compiler community (those developing and those using compilers) value= gcc over clang / llvm. =A0For many reason the latter is winning the day. = =A0Speed, memory footprint, modularity, ease of entry, size of development = community all favor clang / llvm. =A0Anecdotal evidence: my startup (Gnu / = Linux based product) has just switched from gcc to clang.

/john

--f46d041826f67ad34704f05dce28--