[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]gcc?
From: |
Barry Fitzgerald |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]gcc? |
Date: |
Sun, 05 Aug 2001 12:13:16 -0400 |
DotGNU is a GNU package. GCC is a GNU package. As GNU packages, we
have an obligation to work together and support each other's projects if
it's accommodating.
Basically, if GCC can be made to compile to IL and Java bytecode, it
makes it easier for integrate our components with the rest of the GNU
system. Also, we can use other parts of GCC to do things that could
otherwise benefit the performance of the runtime. Basically, if we work
with GCC, we don't do redundant work. However, I suggest reading the
portable.Net FAQ at
http://www.southern-storm.com.au/pnet_faq.html ...
The FAQ gives a decent primer to the problems with doing a GCC
conversion. However, if it can be done - it's a worthy project.
Our status right now is that we can get along without the GCC frontend
(because of portable.Net) but that it would be a strategic win.
-Barry
Scott Lanham wrote:
>
> How does gcc not being modified to compile to IL and JavaVM (other than java)
> affect DotGNU?
>
- [DotGNU]gcc?, Scott Lanham, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Norbert Bollow, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Charles Iliya Krempeaux, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Scott Lanham, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Charles Iliya Krempeaux, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Norbert Bollow, 2001/08/04
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?,
Barry Fitzgerald <=
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Keith Poole, 2001/08/05
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, John, 2001/08/05
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, David Sugar, 2001/08/05
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Keith Poole, 2001/08/06
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Rhys Weatherley, 2001/08/06
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Rhys Weatherley, 2001/08/06
- [DotGNU]We can destroy Microsoft's effective monopoly of the desktop, Norbert Bollow, 2001/08/06
- Re: [DotGNU]We can destroy Microsoft's effective monopoly of the desktop, Barry Fitzgerald, 2001/08/09
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, David Sugar, 2001/08/06
- Re: [DotGNU]gcc?, Bradley M. Kuhn, 2001/08/06