On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 06:41:04PM -0500, Brian Barnes wrote:
>
> Well, except for the fact that development of a llvm-based replacement
> is not proceeding, no plans exist for it to proceed, would have to be
> started from scratch, may not be free, and would take years... but
> you're still missing the point: Jack and I are pessimistic about a free,
> feature-complete llvm-based replacement _ever_ existing for Fortran.
> Besides, if gcc/gfortran 4.5 doesn't work on OS X, I lose an update to my
> normal toolchain, and I'm trying to get work done here!
>
> I'd also prefer to be able to use the same free compiler (gcc/gfortran)
> for development on both OS X and linux (since most HPC codes will
> eventually be run on linux machines for data collection). The
> alternative, buying the Intel compiler to get work done, is just more
> fodder for the people that want to talk about the "Apple Tax".
>
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Brian,
What some folks here miss is that a major chunk of the MacPorts
and Fink user base are scientific or engineering users. You might
find a few into the geek trick of running Gnome or KDE under MacOS X
but in terms of actual productive work, those packages are marginal
to what many folks are using these packaging systems for. I would
also point out that Fink has seen many users migrate over due to
the paucity of scientific packages in MacPorts. This might account
for the blase attitude here.
Jack
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
