[M3devel] ***SPAM*** RE: main in C or not? also, backend....

[Dragiša Durić]

And with C you divorce source level from debugging. Also, Modula-3 was
there, early in it's lifetime. For some reason, SRC team went debate-RMS
route.
IMO, it's better to make effort for better dwarf info to object code,
and even better to go LLVM.

On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 05:46 +0000, Jay K wrote:
> You could say the same thing about the gcc internal representation,
> but no.
> C is a much more portable more documented more implemented more known
> assembly.
> 
>  - Jay
> 
> > From: dragisha at m3w.org
> > To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 07:26:14 +0200
> > CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> > Subject: Re: [M3devel] main in C or not? also, backend....
> > 
> > Looks like a lobotomy for me.
> > 
> > GNU Pascal folks are on similar crossroads now, only they are forced
> > because they follow GCC changes "in realtime", as opposed to fixed
> > version approach used by cm3.
> > 
> > C *is* assembly and approach, except this debugger/debugging
> lobotomy
> > thing, is sound. Except - there are better assemblies, and if we are
> > divorcing cm3 from GCC then let's do it properly - going LLVM way.
> > 
> > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 04:50 +0000, Jay K wrote:
> > > stock gdb will have very good type information where today it has
> > > virtually none.
> > > Besides the other debuggers like windbg/VisualStudio.
> > > Expressions would be in C perhaps.
> > > You could still hack on m3gdb if you really want, but it seems of
> > > reduced utility. 
> > -- 
> > Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org>
> > 

-- 
Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org>