Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 18:19:48 +0700 From: =?UTF-8?B?IkMuIEJlcmdzdHLDtm0i?= <cbergstrom@pathscale.com> To: Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> Cc: =?UTF-8?B?dXMgTW9ya8WrbmFz?= <hinokind@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmk=?=, Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, yuri@rawbw.com Subject: Re: GSoC: Making ports work with clang Message-ID: <4BDEB154.8060104@pathscale.com> In-Reply-To: <4BDEA926.4030900@andric.com> References: <op.vb0w1zrh43o42p@klevas> <4BDD28E2.8010201@rawbw.com> <op.vb3iwpzw43o42p@klevas> <20100503092213.GA1294@straylight.m.ringlet.net> <4BDEA78F.90303@pathscale.com> <4BDEA926.4030900@andric.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 2010-05-03 12:38, "C. Bergström" wrote: > >> What's really the goal here? What problem are you working to solve? >> May I humbly say that building software with a different compiler in >> itself doesn't really accomplish anything. >> > > Of course it does. It forces you to make your software portable. > and your point is? Are you trying to say that s/building/porting/ between compilers is going to magically make the software (have less bugs, more performance or better robustness) Porting could be a means-to-an-end, but still it's not an end goal.. I'm digging at what's the end goal.. After it's all ported what magically happens?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BDEB154.8060104>