From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 15 12:28:41 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 A1E0E106570A
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:28:41 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz)
Received: from vlakno.cz (77-93-215-190.static.masterinter.net [77.93.215.190])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6938FC1D
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:28:40 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8F89CB067;
	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:28:21 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz
Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (lev.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id ZxGovD9OM81g; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:28:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vlk.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A7179CB081;
	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:28:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: (from rdivacky@localhost)
	by vlk.vlakno.cz (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id n0FCS5KR048921;
	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:28:06 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rdivacky)
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:28:05 +0100
From: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>
To: Pegasus Mc Cleaft <ken@mthelicon.com>
Message-ID: <20090115122805.GA48561@freebsd.org>
References: <496F0D1D.7080505@andric.com>
	<6c51dbb10901150344s409cd834p3cd8fae189e42a68@mail.gmail.com>
	<9225949D37F24E01AA5FC01169A256F2@PegaPegII>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9225949D37F24E01AA5FC01169A256F2@PegaPegII>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, FuLLBLaSTstorm <fullblaststorm@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become
	standardcompiler?)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:28:42 -0000

>    I dont know clang, llvm, pcc, etc. very well, but.. Would this solve our 
> problem where we will still need an assembler, linker, archiver, et al?


1) clang and llvm are not two choices :) it's one

2) llvm uses special "bytecode" that gets compiled into native machine
code so technically speaking "classic" assembler is not needed for llvm/clang.

the chain with clang is: clang -> llvm bc -> native binary

you can get the (human readable) assembler if you want to (I think) but it's
not necessary

the same goes with linker etc.