>>4 GCC's internal compiler format is "intentionally obfuscated". It's exceedingly difficult to study what it is and how to use it if you don't dedicate your life to it as the GCC programmers have. LLVM on the other hand was designed to be modular and reusable by anybody. That team had the benefit of learning the lessons of GCC.
>>6 I emphasized the "intentionally obfuscated" not because the GCC team had conspired in history to do something like, "hahaha, you know what would be funny, let's do the GCC internal representation so complex that nobody could possibly touch it". This was actually a natural consequence of their work that they didn't invest too much effort to engineer a better way for that specific issue.
LLVM began as project to replace this part of GCC's work because it was too difficult for programmers to work with GCC to get this kind of information.
Name:
Anonymous2015-07-31 19:02
language that's mature enough to have optimizing compilers
>>7 It's mainly because of RMS' petty fighting with and paranoia against proprietary software, and the fact that most of the GNUtards just aren't that great at programming (but they are great at arguing about license minutiae and political drama.) Look at things like coreutils for example. His goal was to make GCC difficult for others to improve with proprietary extensions, and it partially succeeded because it made GCC difficult for anyone to improve.
Name:
Anonymous2015-08-01 10:58
C, LLVM, JVM.
One of these is not like the other.
Fuck C. It's a piece of shit, old-ass, broken patched over language for cunts.
Name:
Anonymous2015-08-01 11:04
>>13 Idk man, I have to say this, all languages are fun to me. PHP, perl, C, C++, lisp, factor, haskell.
So the next task is to combine into 1 executable, similar idea to busybox except with better (not GPL) license.
Name:
Anonymous2015-08-02 17:27
>>18 I see no flag being implemented, not just -u. Also, will you include translations to various languages? (AFAIK Golang works with chinese n shit, right?)
>>23 From what I understand, it gets used at Google for various internal services and glue. Most web "products" are a mix of components written in several different languages anyway, so faulting Go for not powering an entire product seems silly.
>>23 What is the purpose of rewriting stable and mature software that does its job properly? Google's existing systems are much older than Go. Writing things in a new language only makes sense for brand new projects or projects that truly need a rewrite.
Name:
Anonymous2015-08-03 15:06
>>23 Programmers ``giterdone'' in Java, C, C++, or a dynamically typed language. Go and Rust are for trolling the competitors. Haskell is an epic troll on a whole other scale.