If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
So because he knows the FSF he is not allowed to make comments and objections and try to improve some things without being called an attacker of the FSF?
Really? You must be kidding.
Not exactly. He should know what is FSF stance on this and he should be aware the suggestions he made will be seen as something bad. You won't go to MS and tell them to switch to GPL, because it will give them huge development boost. Even if it was true they won't accept such idea.
I't's not a question of performance, MSVC is lacking in performance and conformance, but it's still in wide use because it's provided with Windows. Work on a project that has to compile on MSVC and you'll understand, no c99 support, many of the optional features of c++ that you actually want are not implemented, etc. LLVM is steered by apple for their use, I know that there are others working on it, but I'm always nervous of a proprietary vendor becoming central in the FOSS chain. That said, I'm not sure I agree with ESR, since GCC has improved massively since LLVM/clang started generating press, and I think that having two large competing projects actually spurs innovation and everything else good. In that regard I'm much more concerned with the GNOME falling out of favor and nothing rising to replace it.
I'm also a bit worried about GNOME. Not because of the changes that everyone is complaining about though. I think they have made a usable desktop, I'm more worried about its modularity, divercity and robustness when it comes to both the code and the community. The nice thing about most open source projects though is that they are always as big as they need to be, and competition is never a fatal issue.
I also find ESR's idea a bit dissonant in these Snowden revelation times. In my oppinion open source and its independent peer reviews are the best guarantee against bad influence
No, but I do remember a few years ago when the majority of Phoronix articles were either diverse technical benchmarks; or deliberate, well thought-out commentary and aggregation of material related to `hot` current topics. Not "some guy said something shit-stirring on a mailing list". Maybe my spectacles are rose-tinted.
That's funny, because it's used probably in every Linux distribution. Clang can't even compile Linux kernel yet and GCC is faster and more feature rich. I'd like to hear about those "technical" merits you're talking about. Clang is nice, but it's still behind GCC.
Clang can't compile Linux because of all the GCC extensions built right into the Kernel, though I believe there's a branch that Clang can compile. As for performance, OpenMP support will likely drop within the year, and I'd suspect GCC will fall behind there as well.