On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 07:18:12PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/13/2010 07:14 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Paolo,
>> I hope you don't think I was trolling in my initial post. Assuming
>> plugins will eventually be welcomed into the FSF gcc source tree in
>> general, there is a valid argument for having dragon-egg present with
>> a configure option that builds it if the proper llvm is available.
>
> I was absolutely not thinking of anyone in this thread.
>
> FWIW, my opinion is that I think it would be nice to have dragonegg
> build out-of-the-box with FSF GCC (and I would very much welcome that my
> distro applied the patch, if not) however I don't see a reason to have
> it live in the FSF repository.
Paolo,
It is unclear to me what the original intentions were when the
plugin infrastructure was created. That is, was it envisioned that
FSF could accumulate the plugins directly in the source tree to
ensure they were well maintained across FSF gcc releases?
Jack
>
> On the other hand, I would welcome a gcc-clang front-end in the FSF
> repository. 16 months ago I probably would have even given it a shot.
>
> Paolo
