From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 17 15:15:35 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0CC4106564A for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:15:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6888FC0A for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:15:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [84.49.246.2]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A877C6D43F; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 8D310844C6; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:15:34 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: FuLLBLaSTstorm References: <20090115084515.GA91157@freebsd.org> <496F0D1D.7080505@andric.com> <6c51dbb10901150344s409cd834p3cd8fae189e42a68@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:15:34 +0100 In-Reply-To: <6c51dbb10901150344s409cd834p3cd8fae189e42a68@mail.gmail.com> (fullblaststorm@gmail.com's message of "Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:44:12 +0500") Message-ID: <86fxjiyne1.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:15:37 -0000 FuLLBLaSTstorm writes: > I fully agree with it, too. Why not to put something like > OPTION_COMPILER=3D`gcc|clang|llvm' so every portion of system designed > for particular compiler could use the right one? I assume you are joking, and / or have no actual software development experience? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no