From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <20130323094510.GA2074@polynum.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130323094510.GA2074@polynum.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <278524C8-689F-4DBE-A73E-2BFB5D63612A@bitblocks.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:17:12 -0700
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] gcc not an option for Plan9
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 308377c6-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

It has long been the case that gcc can only be compiled with gcc. Switching i=
ts impl. lang. to c++ doesn't make the porting problem any worse.

The other "industrial strength" open source c/c++ compiler clang/llvm is als=
o written in c++.

They can both be built on windows so it would certainly be possible to port t=
hem to plan9 if there was real demand.=20=