5+ Years Late: LLVM's AMD Excavator Target Was Missing Two Features

[starshipeleven]

So, you call all spring framework users parasites?

they are already Java developers, do we need to go further than that?

It's voluntary sharing and cooperation on development of reusable tools and libraries for proprietary domain specific applications.

Different names for the same thing.

GPL just enforces freedom as in free beer, which must be given by all derived software developers. So, it is anti-capitalist.

enforced opensource is as anti-capitalist as permissive opensource is pro-capitalist (i.e. "it is not")

[Michael_S]

So, you call all spring framework users parasites? It's voluntary sharing and cooperation on development of reusable tools and libraries for proprietary domain specific applications. GPL just enforces freedom as in free beer, which must be given by all derived software developers. So, it is anti-capitalist. And, socialism works the best for lazy parasites, who don't want to put effort into quality work.

I didn't call users parasites. I called the people who take an open source project and then make and sell a proprietary version, without contributing anything back to the original project, parasites. Yes, a "proprietary domain specific application" is parasitic. If it's really proprietary and domain specific, write your own complete stack.

I don't have any problem with people earning money, even tons of money, for their work. I have a problem with people getting money for what they own. If we work together and you work longer, harder, or smarter than me, you deserve more money. If you own the company where I work because you inherited it from your grandparents, and you sip margaritas in a beach house while I work, you don't deserve a cent. Even if you own the company where I work because you busted your ass twenty years ago, and now you're relaxing in a beach house, you still don't deserve a cent. Pay should be for labor, not for ownership.

Anything else is hypocrisy. "Getting paid for doing nothing is evil. Unless you're a shareholder, then it's totally awesome."

[Guest]

I didn't call users parasites. I called the people who take an open source project and then make and sell a proprietary version, without contributing anything back to the original project, parasites. Yes, a "proprietary domain specific application" is parasitic. If it's really proprietary and domain specific, write your own complete stack.

I don't have any problem with people earning money, even tons of money, for their work. I have a problem with people getting money for what they own. If we work together and you work longer, harder, or smarter than me, you deserve more money. If you own the company where I work because you inherited it from your grandparents, and you sip margaritas in a beach house while I work, you don't deserve a cent. Even if you own the company where I work because you busted your ass twenty years ago, and now you're relaxing in a beach house, you still don't deserve a cent. Pay should be for labor, not for ownership.

Anything else is hypocrisy. "Getting paid for doing nothing is evil. Unless you're a shareholder, then it's totally awesome."

Couple of warm words,... Sounds like complete communism. Actually, the ability to make profit from owned things drives effort into research and development. If people are paid for labour, then they don't care about improvement of things... (there is some little number of exceptions)

Or how is this research and development paid in yours ideal world? Who pays it? What's the cashflow from end-user to labour investing the time into research and development, which will produce benefits in future?

[NotMine999]

I had developed a toy frontend for LLVM and also a tiny frontend for GCC. It's much more comfortable to use LLVM and it doesn't require to fork the whole jungle, also it doesn't require to work with obscure makefiles. Also, GCC impairs developer's freedom heavily. LLVM is the future of OSS compilers.

And LLVM doesn't cause global warming, won't burn down forests, and doesn't kick puppies like GCC?

[ed31337]

I welcome llvm providing competition to gcc, which helps improve gcc. However, I still like gcc a lot better than llvm. LLVM's overly permissive license makes me leary of it becoming the dominant compiler, then having the rug ripped out from under us when Apple, Google or some other big corporation decides to take it proprietary.

And for what it's worth, ever since Qt Creator started moving towards using llvm backends, performance has decreased and bugginess has increased. The function drop down list in Qt Creator used to populate instantly, now I have to wait around for it to get populated, and sometimes it doesn't even get populated for whatever reason. Very irritating.