From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-181945-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7740 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2014 14:48:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7730 invoked by uid 89); 10 Feb 2014 14:48:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-oa0-f54.google.com
Received: from mail-oa0-f54.google.com (HELO mail-oa0-f54.google.com) (209.85.219.54) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:48:51 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id i4so7594876oah.13        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:48:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;        bh=bNVYAcrZu4AMnOtbALpoEi/DWch/e4tz5fcgISWfwhA=;        b=dM9spYM208RxlMf1Gf4DRuJQhXQhDLlFb3SaSVQmH0OusTkIaOcIvsRgOOt+tS3nRe         W5IaEGULbo1PVMIWC9i0u/IMREoqmkzDJRe1ddqcDp2gBrzXiS/bQLFSBncTbTl6iWLS         lgsZxThF2Y6WZOhMUs4B7y5V/hLWTmT6wBVQ2tpPyfdT1cxBewDx7ZsoN8vEdcdXNxSt         QRROgOwTlhtYYn4VwddMxOZeb3+Lter5Q4A5HivxqfyEdnXV8naxDYpi8+QwMU9QbwHZ         JCQyCG+plA6Ci/MzZEodhvHF52beJui986TNs7iYpLVvmWASW8YPbh9R4evObWzXeFx7         nbzw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlAhumx3omrkWGK9n5btjK8nVfJfJi2J8EqAG4UcMa930JVr3+ZO6zBwK685QPww4uS0FkeDSA43gWmIoYjy+wJYEzCgCwHgno29s3Deiap7Wtc74IoPR85TWVNQEbFv6kjGsf4JeTg8CLlNM2iewS+FPuAqsu7/2GPZycFnM3OmmDghza2KdbAObZUKos9itkRSFkx
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.146.104 with SMTP id tb8mr1892230obb.54.1392043729300; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:48:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.182.22.229 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:48:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMSE1kckPt0Tr4qTCG3W-HQ31EsaZPFOMbqyOW6zO86oGWTuAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMSE1kdfpeLp6NEc+jnEWqi0KWV-+=Q701UsiLhgcn13X6fYcA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMSE1ke32x19T07uidRJWiOpYDs3eSnKEL3u_dDHxBHJQR84cg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAD_=9DSZs=H3=GJnkv1VOaNi01FnSM4o7mb_51QwHZgs1BW7LQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMSE1kckPt0Tr4qTCG3W-HQ31EsaZPFOMbqyOW6zO86oGWTuAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:48:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAD_=9DQ=8nUnoyhqBY7g4W+eDh28s2fVJx=1ciCE2yjwdi0ivA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LLVM collaboration?
From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>
To: Renato Golin <renato.golin@linaro.org>
Cc: gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00123.txt.bz2

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin@linaro.org> wrote:

> * GCC and LLVM collaboration / The Open Source Compiler Initiative
>
> With LLVM mature enough to feature as the default toolchain in some
> Unix distributions, and with the inherent (and profitable) share of
> solutions, ideas and code between the two, we need to start talking at
> a more profound level. There will always be problems that can't be
> included in any standard (language, extension, or machine-specific)
> and are intrinsic to the compilation infrastructure. For those, and
> other common problems, we need common solutions to at least both LLVM
> and GCC, but ideally any open source (and even closed source)
> toolchain. In this BoF session, we shall discuss to what extent this
> collaboration can take us, how we should start and what are the next
> steps to make this happen.

Looks good.  Registered.


Thanks. Diego.