From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151127124251.GA625@polynum.com>
References: <CAOw7k5hUrs+Bok97Wopx8_ZNe_LX=Qrfeu3bj=XG+92Kn3F=cg@mail.gmail.com>
	<C72B6C72-BBBC-4678-B1CC-B4A5FE6C7F7B@gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5jfszQQ1kZ+qKNZ+4PkSo-u0QRMEDBJSR1GDiM_ZsqOzQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5jps0Zpv38+5fjA_5OSsLqhGC5aYwsarSDkmh4oBQs-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<835ECE9E-472C-448D-8125-67BBACB09752@gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5j2W5v8MzCBqBcvGd=Q9h5+ZM00=tWnDRy-CTjn3BGYxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANUoZoEzsDNfwhFNUaTGgsQ0EB9Na7XyMAETTzPat8r8ZAc=+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<69275011-637E-4D0C-9E17-2F0CF1B93503@gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5heCVvBLOpMotWw9fnrVmHz-9M3n4PfoBZhsSdTR_OVHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHL7psFXqTYF-z1NhxBekxoTssrBk_w9sh+jyzzJd7srgew+kA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151127124251.GA625@polynum.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:07:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHL7psH_mL-WaszdcPNgR5XCmic9Zx=KijyuanvPZXvphkxrDw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b873dd24ace3c05258636fa
Subject: Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 78e40688-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

--047d7b873dd24ace3c05258636fa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

2015-11-27 13:42 GMT+01:00 <tlaronde@polynum.com>:

> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:13:20AM +0100, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> >
> > I know nothing about compilers, but actually gcc and clang dimension and
> > complexity is astonishing.
>
> It's not astonishing: it's research. They want to prove that a black
> hole does exist.
>

Funny, but actually I was wondering if there is any subtle issue in the
standards of the C language that makes it somehow hard to implement.
For example I've met a few times weird implementations of libraries and
frameworks dictated by broken standards: once they are in, they can never
be removed due to backward compatibility. I thought that Charles (that also
implemented the Limbo compiler) might have referenced these kind of issues
in his pun.


Giacomo

--047d7b873dd24ace3c05258636fa
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">2015-11-27 13:42 GMT+01:00  <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:tlaronde@polynum.com" target=3D"_blank">tlaronde@polynum.com</a>=
&gt;</span>:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #cc=
c solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:13:20=
AM +0100, Giacomo Tesio wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I know nothing about compilers, but actually gcc and clang dimension a=
nd<br>
&gt; complexity is astonishing.<br>
<br>
</span>It&#39;s not astonishing: it&#39;s research. They want to prove that=
 a black<br>
hole does exist.<br></blockquote></div><br></div>Funny, but actually I was =
wondering if there is any subtle issue in the standards of the C language t=
hat makes it somehow hard to implement.<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra">For e=
xample I&#39;ve met a few times weird implementations of libraries and fram=
eworks dictated by broken standards: once they are in, they can never be re=
moved due to backward compatibility. I thought that Charles (that also impl=
emented the Limbo compiler) might have referenced these kind of issues in h=
is pun.<br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gma=
il_extra">Giacomo<br></div></div>

--047d7b873dd24ace3c05258636fa--