Re: [9fans] Plan9 development

[Christopher Nielsen <cnielsen@pobox.com>]

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 19:32,  <lucio@proxima.alt.za> wrote:
>> I always had the impression that the object formats
>> used by the various ?l are more for kernels and the
>> various formats expected by loaders than for userland
>> apps.  For userland, I would think the intent is for
>> there to be a single consistent object format (at least
>> for a given architecture).
>
> Well, we had alef for Irix and other similar user level/application
> level tricks that no longer seem important today, but without the
> option trickery Go would have had to wait for Ian Lance Taylor to
> produce a GCC version :-(
>
> Myself, I'm still trying to combine the Go toolchain with the Plan 9
> toolchain so that we can have a consistent framework for real
> cross-platform development, but the task doesn't quite fit within my
> resources and skills.  I don't have a problem with the trickery, it's
> just a shame (IMO) that it wasn't designed the same way as the target
> architecture stuff.  I understand the complexity involved and I'm still
> looking for ideas on reducing that complexity.
>
> Typically, the Go toolchain still has (had?) code in it to produce
> Plan 9 object code, but one could easily imagine that stuff
> bit-rotting.  If it hasn't been removed yet, it sure runs the risk of
> being removed before long.

FWIW, someone is working on a Plan 9 port of Go.

-- 
Christopher Nielsen
"They who can give up essential liberty for temporary safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots & tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson