darwin may lose primary target status on FSF gcc

[Toby Peterson]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 11:27, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 05:31:40PM -0700, Toby Peterson wrote:
>>
>> Given current reality, you're probably better off contributing to
>> llvm-gfortran... or better yet, a native fortran front-end for llvm.
>> FSF gcc is barely relevant on our platform these days.
>>
>> - Toby
>
> Toby,
>   I should have added that you are far more likely to eventually
> see a fortran compiler on llvm via FSF gcc with a llvm compiler plugin.
> The recently added GPLv3 exemption for compiler plugins allows
> FSF's gcc's front and middle ends to use llvm without tainting
> either's licenses. There is some discusson of this but I wouldn't
> expect anything before gcc 4.6 or later. Starting from scratch to
> implement a fortran compiler will take many years (as it did for the
> g95 code base to mature into a fully integrated gfortran compiler).

I don't care... although your claim that it'd take "many years" is a
little silly.

- Toby