Re: Defending GCC considered futile

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:42:29 -0500
> From: "Perry E. Metzger" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> 
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 17:48:11 -0500 Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> wrote:
> > 
> >   > Because the rest of the compiler wasn't intentionally
> >   > made non-modular,
> > 
> > Neither was GCC.
> > 
> > I wrote GCC to be as modular as I knew how to do -- while getting it
> > to work as fast as I could.  Maybe I could have made it more modular
> > if I had worked on it slowly for ten years aiming for elegance, but
> > it was imperative to have a compiler as soon as possible
> > so as to have a GNU system as soon as possible.
> 
> Yes, but that was long ago. More recently people have worked to make
> GCC more modular and to re-use of GCC for other work, but much such
> work seems to have been discouraged.

Modularizing GCC is not discouraged.  It actually happens as we speak,
check out the latest developments in GCC 5 and GDB.