From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: lost.goblin@gmail.com
Received: by 10.236.153.68 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 04:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimS6MZRWfFX5bVNrtCZLPtS4WTVWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinmoxBpnbSqYD5SY5mO4Y+do45O+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1106202342440.9045@localhost>
	<BANLkTinsk=-2o5vw9h4q50Gvxb17O3z0Xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimS6MZRWfFX5bVNrtCZLPtS4WTVWg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:13:21 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: pSZ9UqjIn4wGHj702f3els7hY_0
Message-ID: <BANLkTin3R9+5gh5vTPc58fwqnTVg0Cji9g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: alternative compilers
From: Uriel <uriel@berlinblue.org>
To: 9front@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Noah Evans <noah.evans@gmail.com> wrote:
> The minix guys just did a bunch of work incorporating clang et al into
> the minix codebase, they might have interesting opinions on the
> matter, if you guys are interested.

Interested in a C++ project that uses GCC as its backend? Are you drunk?

uriel

> Noah
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:01 PM, suharik <gleb.ax.sh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> - clang: C++; also just gcc in green
>> Is it possible to simplify llvm/clang compiler?
>