On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:57:42 -0700, Chris Cappuccio wrote: > h...@riseup.net [h...@riseup.net] wrote: > > > > On the other hand XTerm is an old code and memory hog that relies on X > > toolkit and supports features you'll find nowhere thus will never need > > (like Tektronix). > > > > Xenocara is the classic X tree, as much as possible. Any replacement for > xterm needs to be really good :) > > > LLVM/Clang > > > > * BSD license - we're not stuck with the old GCC crap > > * The code is cleaner > > * Lack of linuxisms, better follows the standars > > * Much better error handling > > * Building the compiller itself is easier > > > > I realize that everything has its pros and cons (like URXVT is > > GPL-licensed, st is pretty much hackish for an ordinary user and Clang > > is not, well, "mature" yet). But ain't pros of the programs above not > > enough to actually make it in the base? > > > > Replacing GCC is no trivial task, but Bitrig already did it.
"Did it" aka "now rely on packages to build base, some of them with a non-free license". > And they > don't support most of the platforms that OpenBSD does. LLVM doesn't either. See the connection? :) > Frankly, if you want to play with OpenBSD compiled with LLVM, try Bitrig. > OpenBSD still keeps ancient versions of GCC in-tree (and Miod maintains them) > to support platforms like m88k, vax, m68k, and so on. OpenBSD has the only > working m88k GCC 3 implementation, for instance. > > Maybe at some point in the future, OpenBSD might include LLVM if there > is some compelling reason to do so. But that hasn't happened yet.
