[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Defending GCC considered futile
|
From: |
Perry E. Metzger |
|
Subject: |
Re: Defending GCC considered futile |
|
Date: |
Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:29:41 -0500 |
On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:14:17 +0200 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> Modularizing GCC is not discouraged. It actually happens as we
> speak, check out the latest developments in GCC 5 and GDB.
If this is the case, what is the problem with Emacs directly linking
against the GCC front end to get access to the C and C++ AST?
Perry
--
Perry E. Metzger address@hidden
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, (continued)
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, David Kastrup, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Stefan Monnier, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, John Yates, 2015/02/10
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Perry E. Metzger, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile,
Perry E. Metzger <=
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Perry E. Metzger, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Perry E. Metzger, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Florian Weimer, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Stefan Monnier, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, raman, 2015/02/11
- Re: Defending GCC considered futile, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/11