On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:51:34AM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2012-10-30 02:58, Brad Roberts wrote: [...] > >today: > > compiler invokes tools and just passes on output > > > >ideal (_an_ ideal, don't nitpick): > > compiler invokes tool which returns structured output and uses that > > > >intermediate that's likely easier to achieve: > > compiler invokes script that invokes tool (passing args) and fixes > >output to match structured output > > Even better, in my opinion: Both the linker and compiler is built > as a library. The compiler just calls a function from the linker > library, like any other function, to do the linking. The linker uses > the appropriate exception handling mechanism as any other function > would. No need for tools calling each other and parsing output data. [...]
+1. This is 2012, we have developed the concept of libraries, why are we still trying to parse output between two tools (compiler & linker) that are so closely intertwined? Not the mention the advantages of having the compiler and linker as a library: reusability in IDEs, adaptability to *runtime* compilation, and a host of other powerful usages. T -- "A one-question geek test. If you get the joke, you're a geek: Seen on a California license plate on a VW Beetle: 'FEATURE'..." -- Joshua D. Wachs - Natural Intelligence, Inc.