From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com (Skip Tavakkolian) Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 09:25:56 -0700 Subject: [9fans] Go Plan 9 In-Reply-To: <64dce36b5502bd3ef48f9aff2dee7ff6@ladd.quanstro.net> References: <033fb4bad1a5301dc98a6c7610c48bd9@ladd.quanstro.net> <20110403145714.GF1805@fangle.proxima.alt.za> <64dce36b5502bd3ef48f9aff2dee7ff6@ladd.quanstro.net> Message-ID: <3964FC73-8FBC-4A38-8A0C-38B7B5DD270B@gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: c692009a-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Why can't we use linuxemu to run the build? -Skip On Apr 3, 2011, at 8:43 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: >> As GNU says, GNU is not Unix (or Plan 9). There is no #ifdef-free >> way to satisfy both toolchains unless one wants to pervert the Plan 9 >> toolchain. One trivial change to GCC, namely Plan 9's use of empty names >> to represent unused arguments, would improve GCC greatly, but is unlikely >> to be accepted by the developers. The alternative is a pain in the butt. > > a sed script in the plan9-specific could do the trick. ideally, though, > the go source wouldn't redefine getc(), and the include could no longer > be necessary. i've seen go define cget in other places, that might be a > solution; but i don't know the local customs well. > >> In passing, Erik, you made some changes to Yacc to accept //-comments, >> do you still have those at hand? Do you have some idea why they were >> not applied to P9 Yacc? > > they have been applied. thanks to geoff for integrating the > change: /n/sources/patch/applied/yacccmt > > - erik >