Re:Gcc Misinterprets Trivial Loop as Infinite
by paulgb on Saturday July 25, 2009 @12:23AM
(#722968)
Really? Why would they do that?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
If the front end and back end can be separated cleanly, then a company could put their proprietary compiler back end behind the GCC front end without violating the GPL. Stallman has always worried about things like this; his objections to virtual machines have a similar basis.
Re:Gcc Misinterprets Trivial Loop as Infinite
by Scriptor on Saturday July 25, 2009 @01:27AM
(#723024)
That sounds like the same strategies used by proprietary software companies who go through all sorts of loops to discourage uses that don't ideologically fit with them. Almost like Free's version of DRM.
Re:Gcc Misinterprets Trivial Loop as Infinite
by paulgb on Saturday July 25, 2009 @03:20AM
(#723079)
Wow, and this is stated explicitly? Seems like cutting off the nose to spite the face. I guess ideology is more important than code quality to the FSF. They have every right to do it, of course, but as an outsider it seems counter-productive
Re:Gcc Misinterprets Trivial Loop as Infinite
by blasdel on Saturday July 25, 2009 @10:30PM
(#723977)
Witness the saga of ECGS -- people had to fork GCC because the FSF refused to take patches from the community.
The FSF's concern was to have employees maintaining (and controlling the development of) the software and as far as they were concerned that was that.