Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:36:11 -0800 (PST) From: bf <bf2006a@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Cc: bms@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Why LLVM may be a step forward Message-ID: <540351.62331.qm@web39108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Simpson wrote:
> Hi,
> I'll chime in with my analysis...
Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Eitan Adler <eitanadlerlist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I never took care about GPLv2 and v3
>>
>>> differences but know, this seems to come to relevance in some way.
I ducked in here to find tinderbox results, and I find the fur flying
over this compiler issue ...
> [1] RAW described the phenomenon of "paradigm shift" in terms of waiting
> for a current generation of scientific dogma-followers to die off before
> a new, testable *and* experience-able theroem about reality could be
> shared with all other humans. A bit cutting, but sometimes we have to be
> to administer the medicine!
Er, you mean like after he read Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions"? If you're going to take the trouble to mention someone in
connection with these ideas, you may as well give credit where credit is
due, rather than citing some derivative writer.
...
> I wager this "strange loop" of improved compiler software, originates
> from something which process engineers e.g. in agriculture and the food
> sciences have understood for years -- and an isolated example of where
> engineering in the physical world, can lead to better engineering in the
> virtual world.
I wager that the only reason this example is "isolated" is that you
haven't looked very hard.
My question (and it's sincere, I don't ask to just to rile anyone) is:
regardless of the opinions we express here, how "free" is FreeBSD with
respect to this choice? That is, are there organizations or individuals that now support FreeBSD, without whom development may slow or stall,
that have strong positions with regard to adopting a particular compiler
and toolchain, or not adopting another, and thus may dictate the choice?
Is there a line drawn in the sand with respect to adopting later versions
of gcc in the base system because of the license, for example, or is
that still to be decided?
Regards,
b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?540351.62331.qm>