From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 21:04:14 -0400 From: jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] gcc on plan9 In-Reply-To: <200606071732.40680.corey_s@qwest.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5fa420e8-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 When I got home this evening after a very frustrating couple of days (weeks, really) and found my mailbox slashdotted with this, it took physical restraint to prevent me from replying. But this was too good to resist: On Wed Jun 7 20:33:26 EDT 2006, corey_s@qwest.net wrote: > ... > Wait, no - because I am not Super-Programmer. And also because, one of the > primary benefits of open-source software and code-reuse in general is... well, > so. that. people. may. reuse. code. > ... You missed the 'bad' before 'code'. People are lazy and stupid (me included) and will always look for the easy way out. Open Source (as it is generally understood) has merely lowered the standard for entry. Lucho's work to upgrade David Hogan's GCC port is being done for a very particular purpose, it's part of a Department of Energy research project looking at operating system requirements for the next generation of peta-scale supercomputers and it's necessary to run some of the accepted supercomputer applications on Plan 9 for comparison. The resulting GCC will be, as now, walled off in its own ghetto and not play any part in the day to day life or death struggles of Plan 9. If it proves to be too difficult to get the targeted applications to run this way, we'll look for another solution.