On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> wrote: > There are already plugins in the FSF gcc source tree. Well, OK, just > one (lto-plugin) but there aren't very many plugins at the moment that > are suitable for inclusion in the FSF tree (i.e. not as tightly tied > to a GCC feature that GCC itself can't work fully without it).
Except lto-plugin is a plugin for the gold linker and not for GCC. Oh and the linker has a more stable ABI already because of the way plugins are implemented there. I think most plugins should be done just to experiment with and real passes should become integrated fully and not a plugin at all. This was the same argument I had the last time about plugin database. > > IMHO the nature of the DragonEgg plugin makes it unsuitable for > inclusion in the FSF gcc source tree, ever. It belongs with LLVM sources if anywhere. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
