From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Mon,  2 Dec 2013 16:16:01 -0800
From: Anthony Martin <ality@pbrane.org>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Message-ID: <20131203001601.GC11998@dinah>
References: <CAJSxfmK1LD8AMJNGGnmW7ZC5Vh2uzr6ZtV1uogJt-DR7jvbZGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<ab0885f5fdcf37858d6a3e1f22ebfc10@quintile.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ab0885f5fdcf37858d6a3e1f22ebfc10@quintile.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Go and 21-bit runes (and a bit of Go status)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8f0260d2-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> once said:
> Whne I looked at Go - maybe 2 years ago, I could not see why
> plan9 would not adopt go's 8c/8l and libbio.
>
> obviously others disagree as they have not been back-ported,
> but why not? - I'am not trolling, genuine question.

We couldn't adopt the Go ?[acl] toolchain wholesale
because of incompatible Go-specific changes; e.g.,
disallowing variadic C functions without a #pragma
annotation, a different symtab/pclntab format, etc.

It would take a fair bit of work to make everything
(including libmach) backwards-compatible.

  Anthony