Proposal/question for GPC
scott andrew franco
samiam at moorecad.com
Mon Nov 2 22:25:51 CET 2020
So much for the second coming of Unicode, eh? 
 to get this joke, you have to be both old and have studied documents that were
old when you are young, ie., about the 1960's. Hint: Unicode (the character set)
stole the name of something else...
--------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: Proposal/question for GPC
From: "Jonas Maebe" <jonas at freepascal.org>
Date: 11/2/20 1:04 pm
To: "gpc at gnu.de" <gpc at gnu.de>
On 02/11/2020 21:32, scott andrew franco wrote:
> For the GPC authors
> So this could be considered either a proposal or a question, your choice.
> Recently, for various reasons I have been studying the LLVM project
> (mainly because I am
> now forced to use LLVM on the Mac OS X). As I am sure you know, LLVM is
> popular as a backend. For example, I believe FPC now uses it.
FPC supports it as an optional backend, and it will always be optional
for the reasons outlined in
> An interesting thing about LLVM is that they bent over backwards to make
> sure it was as
> compatible as possible with previous GCC methods, components and
> front-ends, with
> an eye to making it easy to port existing front ends to LLVM.
I'm only aware of the the DragonEgg project
(https://dragonegg.llvm.org/) in the context, but that one hasn't been
updated since LLVM 3.3 (June 2013). I'm not aware of it being easy in
any way to port GCC frontents to LLVM.
There was llvm-gcc before that, but that was even more of a pain to
Gpc mailing list
Gpc at gnu.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gpc