From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 In-Reply-To: <20060608015831.GA3517@ionkov.net> References: <200606071450.40128.corey_s@qwest.net> <0687d9b7f3ee8d0f6da02f7c9af09b9f@collyer.net> <20060608015831.GA3517@ionkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Ignacio Torres Masdeu Subject: Re: [9fans] gcc on plan9 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:49:24 +0200 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 60011f78-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 El 08/06/2006, a las 3:58, Latchesar Ionkov escribi=F3: > I don't understand why is all that fuss about the gcc port. If you =20 > don't > like it, don't use it. Few of the current Plan9 users are going to =20 > use it. > But if the gcc port brings more developers to Plan9, I don't see =20 > how that > can be bad. I am not a developer and I cannot compare gcc with 8c, but from =20 seeing Plan9's architecture and comparing it with other OSs I would =20 trust the people that said that gcc makes you a lazy developer. And about bringing new developers, let me make a parable here: If I move to another country with a different language and customs, I =20= will learn their language and their tradition. Adopting GCC to =20 attract open source developers is like making french an official =20 language in Spain to attract french women. I rejoice on the idea but =20 don't think it would work. Or maybe a better example: it would be like allowing driving on the =20 left lane in USA to attract UK visitors. Not using the left lane =20 wouldn't be an option, for there would be lots of british using MY =20 lane to overtake. And dislexic drivers getting their licenses now for =20= they couldn't before. Best regards, Ignacio=