On Jan 9, 2015, at 5:29 AM, René J.V. Bertin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unless I'm mistaken and it's the other way round, dragonegg is a gcc > front-end to llvm. It's a GCC plugin that swaps out the backend. > Is there any interest to such a thing, given that clang aims to be a drop-in > replacement for gcc, and that code relying on gcc-specific code > generation/optimisation will fail the same way in clang and dragonegg? Clang is only a replacement for C-family languages. DragonEgg enables the use of Fortran and Ada with the LLVM backend. > Judging from their site (dragonegg.llvm.org), the project isn't particularly > well kept up-to-date, as if even the authors fail to see any interest in it? It's not being maintained currently, as far as I know. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18324#c4 > However, if as they claim "fortran works very well", how complicated would it > be to provide a dragonegg-3.5-gcc-4.9 containing at least a fortran front-end > to llvm? (IIUC, dragonegg-3.4-gcc-4.7 is already an endeavour by Jeremy or > another MacPorts dev...) To provide a port? Not complicated. To provide working software that doesn't have upstream backing? Different story. vq _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
