From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7698 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2010 15:30:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 7687 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Apr 2010 15:30:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SARE_MSGID_LONG45,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:30:49 +0000 Received: from hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com [10.3.21.7]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o3EFUlTf030440 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:30:47 -0700 Received: from pwj9 (pwj9.prod.google.com [10.241.219.73]) by hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o3EFUj6d019759 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:30:45 +0200 Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so212476pwj.5 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:30:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.141.90.11 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:30:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <003b01cadbde$21913eb0$64b3bc10$@com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:36:00 -0000 Received: by 10.141.2.14 with SMTP id e14mr7133000rvi.115.1271259044731; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: Notes from the GROW'10 workshop panel (GCC research opportunities workshop) From: Diego Novillo To: =?UTF-8?B?TWFudWVsIEzDs3Blei1JYsOhw7Fleg==?= Cc: Steven Bosscher , Grigori Fursin , Dorit Nuzman , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00339.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:18, Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez wrote: > GCC is better than Clang/LLVM in many aspects but, like it or not, the > opposite is also true, and we should learn from those aspects what we > can, take what is good and drop what is bad. [1] Agreed. > Otherwise, as Ian said in another topic [2]: "I have a different fear: > that gcc will become increasing irrelevant". That's my impression, as well. It is true of just about every code base, if it cannot attract new developers, it stagnates and eventually whithers away. To attract new developers, GCC needs to modernize its internal structure. I have some thoughts on that, but progress has been slow, due mostly to resource constraints. Alternately, GCC could just content itself to being a legacy compiler with a dwindling user base. It won't happen tomorrow, but it may happen eventually. Diego.