On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 09:44:27PM +0100, Ingo Weinhold wrote:
On 12/01/2016 04:55 PM, kallisti5 wrote:
Through all of these conversations, i've never once said to "get rid
of gcc2 (at least until R2 and beyond ;-)) In my eyes having
x86_64 + gcc2 would be ideal for R2 (but we need to work on running 32-bit
code on 64-bit systems)
Just for sake of completeness, since that argument hasn't been mentioned in
this iteration of the discussion yet: Keeping gcc 2 support at all -- even
just as a secondary architecture -- means that the code that needs to be
compilable with gcc 2 (i.e. most of the libraries) cannot use modern C++
features. This hurts more and more with each new C++ standard and is
definitely not helpful for attracting new developers.
The only reasonable option for going forward I see at this point is to add
missing FBC goodies to the gcc 4+ API and fork off the gcc 2 support, either
in-tree or even outsource it.