> > Subject: Re: [mot] serious about clang/llvm? > > > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Daniel Bolgheroni > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 04:43:50AM -0400, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > > > >> i had heard rumours about the openbsd core team having a part of > > > >> openbsd > > > >> built using 'pcc', is it true? if yes, did that effort not produce > > > >> desirable > > > >> results? > > > > > > > > There are more things to LLVM/clang than its complexity and the fact > > > > that it's written in C++. GCC is also pretty complex. For a better > > > > clarification, check this: > > > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=137530560232232&w=2 > > > > > > That doesn't really answer any questions about pcc though... > > > > those were hopes and dreams. not everything pans out. > > > > > > > > hmnn, is it because the openbsd team doesn't have someone to work on bringing > 'pcc' up to openbsd's expectations? > if someone came along to work exclusively on 'pcc' for openbsd, would the team > reconsider using 'pcc' as the default compiler suite?
yes.... you better hire a group of people to work on it... Don't we already do enough?? Good grief.
