On 10 September 2010 15:00, Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Richard Kenner > <ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote: >>> > Some strong way of addressing the concern that this could be used to make >>> > proprietary front-ends or proprietary back-ends using part of GCC! >>> >>> Why is this case different from the existing llvm-gcc? >> >> It's the question of what one means by "plug-in interface". If you >> view it as no different from the existing llvm-gcc, then you're >> basically saying we already HAVE a plug-in interface. So then what are >> we talking about? > > Obviously not about the same thing. > > llvm-gcc is GCC front ends with LLVM as a back end. > > The idea here is clang with GCC as a back end.
They are equivalent in the sense that I would understand why GCC would allow the former but it would fight against the latter. Cheers, Manuel.
