-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Richard Kenner wrote:
>> I think it's quite important for gcc's long-term health to permit and >> even encourage academic researchers and students to use it. And I see >> plugins as directly supporting that goal. > > I don't see that. Why is it that much harder to link in with GCC than doing > it as a plugin? To provide an example: Mozilla has been using elsa/oink to do static analysis and rewriting of the codebase. We would love to use a more mature and correct frontend such as GCC... and we would like to eventually have this static analysis be a standard part of the build process when using the GCC compiler. To avoid requiring everyone who does Mozilla hacking to also do a custom-built GCC would be to write just the static analysis as a plugin, compile that to a .so, and then build with an extra flag such as g++ - -static-analyze=/custom/libmozstaticanalysis.so... in many cases we could even pre-compile this file for common versions of GCC. - --BDS - -- Benjamin Smedberg Platform Guru Mozilla Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://benjamin.smedbergs.us/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHPMKISSwGp5sTYNkRAtX2AKDa2OWDLgQkeXLQjzcI5BzqGf3b2ACgmm1r jnbvtmAnq0GPPb19M/92lFo= =af7b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
