gnupic: Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development


Previous by date: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Ralph Corderoy
Next by date: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Xiaofan Chen
Previous in thread: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Ralph Corderoy
Next in thread:

Subject: Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development
From: "Scott Dattalo" ####@####.####
Date: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000
Message-Id: <4976.71.139.34.26.1226800101.squirrel@ruckus.brouhaha.com>

Ralph Corderoy wrote:

> Anyway, there's no need to argue amongst ourselves about this.

True Ralph, one shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth! Getting one's
head wrapped around gcc's internals is difficult. If the LLVM efforts
allow smart, motivated people to more easily create PIC compilers, then we
should all agree (on this list) that that is a good thing!

Scott



Previous by date: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Ralph Corderoy
Next by date: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Xiaofan Chen
Previous in thread: 16 Nov 2008 01:48:25 -0000 Re: [gnupic] LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Ralph Corderoy
Next in thread:


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.