On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Ian P. Cooke <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 11, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > > • I really want to get something up, running, and debuggable as > > quickly as possible. Having a bootstrap environment quickly is more > > important that targeting the right eventual environment. Even if BitC > > ultimately targets bare metal, being able to run the compiler within an > > established IDE is a Good Thing (TM). There is no benefit here to doing > > everything ourselves. > > > > Is this a change of focus for BitC? I always thought that bare-metal was the > target - an alternative to C for systems programming.
Bare metal remains a target for BitC. But compiler self-host is also a goal, so getting BitC up and running seems like the right first step. The current compiler is probably unmaintainable at this point. shap _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
