-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Richard Kenner wrote:

>> I think it's quite important for gcc's long-term health to permit and
>> even encourage academic researchers and students to use it.  And I see
>> plugins as directly supporting that goal.  
> 
> I don't see that.  Why is it that much harder to link in with GCC than doing
> it as a plugin?

To provide an example: Mozilla has been using elsa/oink to do static
analysis and rewriting of the codebase. We would love to use a more mature
and correct frontend such as GCC... and we would like to eventually have
this static analysis be a standard part of the build process when using the
GCC compiler.

To avoid requiring everyone who does Mozilla hacking to also do a
custom-built GCC would be to write just the static analysis as a plugin,
compile that to a .so, and then build with an extra flag such as g++
- -static-analyze=/custom/libmozstaticanalysis.so... in many cases we could
even pre-compile this file for common versions of GCC.

- --BDS

- --

Benjamin Smedberg
Platform Guru
Mozilla Corporation
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://benjamin.smedbergs.us/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHPMKISSwGp5sTYNkRAtX2AKDa2OWDLgQkeXLQjzcI5BzqGf3b2ACgmm1r
jnbvtmAnq0GPPb19M/92lFo=
=af7b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to