Apple Originally Tried To Give GPL'ed LLVM To GCC

[Rusky]

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU4MzE

I thought this was pretty hilarious. Apple originally wanted to relicense LLVM as GPL and incorporate it into GCC. It was rejected because the FSF is dumb (see below).

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU4MjA

Now, Richard Stallman is calling Clang a "terrible setback" because it's not virally licensed. Not only that, but now GCC is moving in the exact directions that they rejected Apple's LLVM proposal for originally.

[Sslaxx]

Stallman is responsible for many good things. But he is also quite possibly clinically insane. He is at the least very egocentric and... eccentric, never mind dogmatic. It's another GCC decision biting them in the arse (like with EGCS all those years ago).

Honestly, I'd rather be using Clang over GCC, but Clang's Windows support is all but non-existent. Clang's Windows support appears to be coming on nicely it seems - http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.4! Much better than it had been even quite recently.

[Rusky]

Not only is Clang for Windows getting better, it doesn't require a MinGW install, and it's getting to the point that it won't need a VS install either, using the LLD linker. So it'll be a cross-platform toolchain that runs natively on all platforms, and that can cross-compile without being rebuilt.

I guess I can see why Stallman doesn't want a nice compiler to exist on Windows.

[Sslaxx]

Not only is Clang for Windows getting better, it doesn't require a MinGW install, and it's getting to the point that it won't need a VS install either, using the LLD linker. So it'll be a cross-platform toolchain that runs natively on all platforms, and that can cross-compile without being rebuilt.

I guess I can see why Stallman doesn't want a nice compiler to exist on Windows.

A nice compiler on Windows that isn't part of VS? Or MinGW/GCC? Count me in!

[Sslaxx]

http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/01/24/1838241/fsfs-richard-stallman-calls-llvm-a-terrible-setback - also, did you read this? Someone needs to know when to STFU, don't they.

And this quote from it I think is accurate:

[...] Stallman reveals that his primary factor for evaluating the worthiness of a product is not quality, openness, or even license. Rather, he evaluates software based on it's ability to harm his enemies. [...]

[Darkstar2]

CLANG isn't that what YYG uses for its YYC ?

[time-killer-games]

I was wondering the same thing. If it is, does that mean everyone who submitted their GMS apps to the Mac store did so against Apple's terms unknowingly?

[Darkstar2]

I was wondering the same thing. If it is, does that mean everyone who submitted their GMS apps to the Mac store did so against Apple's terms unknowingly?

Hmmm.  I can see it now, YYG panics and deprecates the YYC compiler until further notice.      (anybody reading who is not familiar with YYG might wonder what this all means !)

BTW this is what "Deja-Vu" is using as well.

[Rusky]

Umm. Yes, YYC uses Clang the same way ENIGMA uses GCC. This is in no way against Apple's terms of service- in fact, Apple's SDK uses Clang to compile native Objective-C apps. And DejaVu uses LLVM directly rather than going through Clang.

[Goombert]

Fuck Apple Inc.
https://www.google.com/#q=apple+nsa+zombies

[Sslaxx]

Oh yeah, the company can just go FOADIAF for all I care, but some of the tech they've contributed to (like LLVM/Clang) is great.

In a fit of irony, their mortal rivals Google also contribute to LLVM/Clang's codebase (for similar reasons, too).