> Hi. > > I've recently touched AWK option generate machinery and it's quite > unpleasant to make any adjustments. My question is simple: can we > starting using a scripting language like Python and replace usage of > the AWK scripts? It's probably question for Steering committee, but I > would like to see feedback from community. > > There are some bulletins why I would like to replace current AWK > scripts: > > 1) gcc/optc-save-gen.awk is full of copy&pasted code, due to lack of > flags type classes multiple global variables are created (var_opt_char, > var_opt_string, ...) > > 2) similar happens in gcc/opth-gen.awk > > 3) we do very many regex matches (mainly in gcc/opt-functions.awk), I > believe we should come up with a structured option format that will > make parsing and processing much simpler. > > 4) we can come up with new sanity checks of options: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81397 > > 5) there are various targets that generate *.opt files, one example is > ARM: gcc/config/arm/parsecpu.awk > > where transforms: > ./gcc/config/arm/arm-cpus.in > > I guess having a well-defined structured format for *.opt files will > make it easier to write generated opt files? > > I'm attaching a prototype that can transform optionlist into > options-save.c that can be compiled and works. > > I'm looking forward to a feedback. > Martin <snip>
I was reading phoronix and came upon an article about this email. As a FLOSS dev and someone who is familiar with both languages in question, I'd like to point out that python is an unstable language. It has matured and changed a lot over the years. The tools like python's 2to3 tool have gained an infamous reputation. OTOH, awk is very stable. I have been on the GNU variant's ML for some time and I have noticed that when a question over implementation arises they go looking at and, when necessary, consulting what the other awks are doing. For Python there is only one implementation, thus only one way of thinking about how it works unless you want to change something in the core language. Gentoo's portage is an excellent example of a good language gone bad through less than ideal programming in python and it seems to me that, based on the description above, the awk code in gcc needs a code base cleanup and decrustification, not rewritten in the latest and greatest language simply because it is *the fad* of the day. And yes, by spelling python out as *the* language of choice without any other options Mr. Martin is recommending to us what to choose without any reason whatsoever given. Why not ruby? Or Crystal? Or Mozart? Or *gasp* Fortran? Or Rust, (it's also all the rage)? Or tex? Or SQL (that would at least be interesting to read :) ? A fast development cycle is the typical cry of python enthusiasts (and my foolish self at one point in time), but there are plenty of other fast development languages out there. In my not so humble opinion, this aught to be approached with some degree of wisdom and intelligence as opposed to a zest for something new for newnesses sake. Sincerely, David PS: No, I am not volunteering myself.
