> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> But none of this code will "just work" on Plan 9 (especially the >> Fortran code), so what's the point? > > Why do you say that? > > ron
Looking at GCC, there's plenty more effort required before the full suite of compilers (don't forget ADA's in there, too) is ready for prime time under Plan 9. But it does seem that in going there, it is possible to feed back to GNU how to avoid the more obvious pitfalls (Auto* tools when the compiler in fact defines the environment almost entirely) and, reason prevailing, this might lead to a different approach. One way or another, eventually the current flood of software has to undergo some quality control and at that point it would be good if there were principles by which to "measure" such quality. Looking the other way isn't going to be helpful and we're all caught up in it, so those of us with opinions and knowledge may need to contribute. ++L PS: I still haven't a single offer of software to stress test GCC 3.0, nevermind the assistance I'm bound to need to make use of the C++ features.
