From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12313 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2002 04:28:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12275 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 04:28:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out1.apple.com) (17.254.0.52) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 04:28:53 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g8D4Sqh15110 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:28:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:28:46 -0700 Received: from Matt-Austerns-Computer.local. (vpn-scv-x0-143.apple.com [17.219.192.143]) by scv3.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g8D4Sm305111; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:33:00 -0000 Subject: Re: HPUX C++ ABI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v543) Cc: Stan Shebs , Mark Mitchell , gcc@gcc.gnu.org To: Kumar Gala From: Matt Austern In-Reply-To: <06748B20-C6D0-11D6-8DC1-003065BFB10E@motorola.com> Message-Id: <75688F7A-C6D1-11D6-AA4E-000393B2ABA2@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00519.txt.bz2 On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 09:19 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> But speaking seriously, we Appleites deal with corporate pressure >> to support various hacks by maintaining our own version of GCC and >> taking on all the costs that go with that, so I'm wondering why it >> is that HP can't do the same. While I personally don't have a problem >> doing a little favor for HP, it's going to be really tricky to avoid >> charges of favoritism and bias later on if, say, some Apple feature is >> shot down. > > I have to agree that this is very slippery slope. What stops from > extend this to programming models like the AltiVec PIM. Currently GCC > supports its own variant of the PIM while all other compilers that > implement the specified PIM. > > While making GCC support the AltiVec PIM may introduce code into > places that are required only to support the PIM, it would be more > generally useful to the user base. > > Apple obviously ships a modified GCC that supports the spec'd PIM. I > would be really nice if users could have code that worked under Linux > as well as Mac OS X. We'd be completely in favor of that, of course. --Matt