From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 15 12:53:57 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 F2C1F106564A
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:53:56 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F9318FC1C
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:53:56 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2009 12:53:55 -0000
Received: from p54A3E43A.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO tron.homeunix.org)
	[84.163.228.58]
	by mail.gmx.net (mp030) with SMTP; 15 Jan 2009 13:53:55 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1673122
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18cg9hhXiEcF1bcZFpP7aKeAT0ugIeTolBDXxc1ym
	CmlVybxcbmPX+3
Message-ID: <496F31E2.3070004@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:53:54 +0100
From: Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>
References: <496F0D1D.7080505@andric.com>	<6c51dbb10901150344s409cd834p3cd8fae189e42a68@mail.gmail.com>	<9225949D37F24E01AA5FC01169A256F2@PegaPegII>	<20090115122805.GA48561@freebsd.org>
	<496F2FC0.3050401@gmx.de> <20090115124812.GA51770@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090115124812.GA51770@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.66
Cc: Pegasus Mc Cleaft <ken@mthelicon.com>,
	FuLLBLaSTstorm <fullblaststorm@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
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 12:53:57 -0000

Roman Divacky schrieb:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 01:44:48PM +0100, Christoph Mallon wrote:
>> Roman Divacky schrieb:
>>> 2) llvm uses special "bytecode" that gets compiled into native machine
>>> code so technically speaking "classic" assembler is not needed for 
>>> llvm/clang.
>> This is an irrelevant detail for normal use.
>  
> yes.... but the point is that clang does not need "something that translates
> mov ax, bx to machine code"

It's not problem if your source is C, but what if the source is assembler?

>>> the chain with clang is: clang -> llvm bc -> native binary
>> This is just a kludge, because clang has no proper compiler driver, yet.
> 
> there's a work going on successor of ccc and ccc itself works for a lot of
> cases even today (I use it for compiling freebsd)

I know that, you know it, too. This makes mentioning the kludge even 
more irrelevant, because it is not the normal way you use the compiler. 
Btw, the current compiler driver is just a prototype and will be replaced.