> From [email protected] Fri Oct 23 09:23:36 2015 > From: Theo de Raadt <[email protected]> > To: Raul Miller <[email protected]> > cc: Mayuresh Kathe <[email protected]>, > OpenBSD general usage list <[email protected]> > 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?
