Re: Why?
Paul Vixie wrote:
what i guess i need is some interns who want to work on "Common Modula-3" as
a single-standard based on GCC4 with intent to make the backend part of GCC.
(there's no formal application process for it yet, just send me some e-mail.)
That's a good idea, except we need a way for the adults to play too.
You know - those of us who can contribute a few hours a week, but can't
live on an intern's income...
Ah, heck. Let's start now. What are the points of incompatibility
between PM3 and CM3, and how should they be resolved? What should be
added to the language? What should be taken away?
Hopefully,
- ken
.
Relevant Pages
- Re: Why?
... Paul Vixie wrote: ... Modula-3" as a single-standard based on GCC4 with intent to make the ... backend part of GCC. ...
(comp.lang.modula3) - Re: Why?
... There is still active work on CM3/PM3 ongoing; ... distribution quite some time ago; ... and that it's not a standard backend for GCC means that it "falls just short" ...
(comp.lang.modula3) - Re: Suspicious Gfortran
... I had library conflicts when I tried ... along with their respective versions of gcc: ... gcc4 so I selected to install that along with gfortran. ... just saved what little work I had on the disk and did a fresh V4 install. ...
(comp.lang.fortran) - Re: Is it possible to make void * safer?
... Keith Thompson wrote: ... the above code with gcc, ... Which is correct and if it's gcc4, how does one use the preprocessor ...
(comp.lang.c) - Re: VB language extensions wishlist
... code-emitting compiler, ... rather whatever intermediate codes/files needed by the GCC backend. ... The thing with the MONO runtime is that it may be easier to adapt that ...
(microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion) |
|
