On 11/04/2012 14:21, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 04/11/2012 02:57 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>> However, the concern you raised is only one part of the problem. The
>> other is that, put in a simplified way, GCC is competing with LLVM about
>> new and/or non-fulltime-compiler developers. For me, it looks like LLVM
>> is more appealing to them, and I believe part of the reason for that is
>> the codebase.
>
> There seem to be other opinions as well, some voiced in this thread,
> which just supports my argument that you can't do it right for everyone.
> Part of the reason LLVM is appealing may just be advertising, which we
> don't do at all, perhaps due to the deep-seated inferiority complex we
> have about gcc.
Inferiority complex? I think this thread suggests (and perhaps the -Wall
thread too) that we're more in danger of complacently resting on our laurels.
We have huge inertia, but just because we've always been the big name in
embedded toolkits doesn't mean we always will be.
cheers,
DaveK
