Re: [9fans] A newbie question... - Plan9

This is a discussion on Re: [9fans] A newbie question... - Plan9 ; Hmmm, may i ask a very stupid question? I have working with GCC C++ compiler and MS C++ compiler, and i suppose that there are another compilers in the world... But i don't known any other free compiler (yeah, MS ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 52 of 52

Thread: Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

  1. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    Hmmm, may i ask a very stupid question?
    I have working with GCC C++ compiler and MS C++ compiler, and i
    suppose that there are another compilers in the world...

    But i don't known any other free compiler (yeah, MS compiler is not
    free, but in russia all MS software IS free ). So question is, if we
    couldn't port GCC because it very big job (any other reason?), maybe
    we could port some other compiler with liberal enough licence?

    I'm asking because C++ is very popular language, it have some nice
    benefits (is that word right here?), and there are many software that
    was developed on it.
    Of course C++ could be very ugly in some situations, but Object
    Oriented model is very powerful and C++ is "standard" language for it.
    So modern operation system with out C++ support is something...unusual
    (i don't know right word in english, that describe what i want to say
    )?

    2008/2/4, Uriel :
    > And when you thought it couldn't get better, from the top of
    > http://www.comeaucomputing.com
    >
    > "Bursting With So Much Language Support It Hurts!"
    >
    > Most fortune-worthy line ever.
    >
    > uriel
    >
    > On Feb 4, 2008 12:52 PM, wrote:
    > > > because something had to be used to compile Plan 9 itself, etc and I

    > > figure it's not being done as a cross-compiler.
    > >
    > > I'm sorry my new friend but I think that's the funniest 9fans post I've
    > > ever seen, how ... but .... surely you ..... aw come on
    > >
    > > To redeem myself I shall offer this link to one of the other C compilers
    > > that exist in the world :
    > > http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/1/2c
    > >
    > >

    >


  2. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    Hi,
    > if we
    > couldn't port GCC because it very big job (any other reason?), maybe
    > we could port some other compiler with liberal enough licence?
    >
    >

    If you (not *we*) want to port something port it and let us know when
    it's done.
    The process goes like this :
    "I've done some working code for my XXXX C++ port, it's in my
    contrib directory if someone wants to have a go with it"

    > I'm asking because C++ is very popular language,

    This is Plan 9, popularity isn't very high on the list.

    The reason there is no native C++ compiler is because of it's *lack* of
    popularity in the Plan 9 community, both historically and currently.

    The pattern of "I've just downloaded Plan9 and I want my old tools" is
    very common and we just kind of ignore them except for the anti-GNU
    troll responses.

    You'll (eventually) notice that *most* of the long time Plan 9 users
    don't even join in the discussion, no doubt smiling a "seen it all
    before" smile before pressing Del





  3. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    > If you (not *we*) want to port something port it and let us know when
    > it's done.

    sorry, it my mistake, i do not mean that all community should go and port GCC

    > The pattern of "I've just downloaded Plan9 and I want my old tools" is
    > very common and we just kind of ignore them except for the anti-GNU
    > troll responses.

    Ok, i already figure out this. I was not right(?) when start this
    discussion if there is no C++ in Plan9, that there are some reasons
    for that

    Thanks to all, i'm really sorry if i disturb anyone with this discasion ))


    2008/2/4, Alf :
    > Hi,
    > > if we
    > > couldn't port GCC because it very big job (any other reason?), maybe
    > > we could port some other compiler with liberal enough licence?
    > >
    > >

    > If you (not *we*) want to port something port it and let us know when
    > it's done.
    > The process goes like this :
    > "I've done some working code for my XXXX C++ port, it's in my
    > contrib directory if someone wants to have a go with it"
    >
    > > I'm asking because C++ is very popular language,

    > This is Plan 9, popularity isn't very high on the list.
    >
    > The reason there is no native C++ compiler is because of it's *lack* of
    > popularity in the Plan 9 community, both historically and currently.
    >
    > The pattern of "I've just downloaded Plan9 and I want my old tools" is
    > very common and we just kind of ignore them except for the anti-GNU
    > troll responses.
    >
    > You'll (eventually) notice that *most* of the long time Plan 9 users
    > don't even join in the discussion, no doubt smiling a "seen it all
    > before" smile before pressing Del
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >


  4. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    > The reason there is no native C++ compiler is because of it's *lack* of
    > popularity in the Plan 9 community, both historically and currently.


    "We don't need a C++ compiler because everything is written in C" is just a
    self-fulfilling prophecy.

    I would really like to be able to compile some large C++ apps and use,
    them. I have no interest in writing plan9 versions, the plan9 stuff is what
    I want to use them _for_, I just want some tools which happen to be
    written in C++.

    -Steve

  5. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    When I started Plan 9, I was actually happy that some of the tools I
    wanted (grap, prof) were already available. I wanted to try GCC to
    try to port a web browser, but Abaco is growing fast, and I'll stick
    with that. I'm already porting pico, and that's in my contrib directory.

    On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Filipp Andronov wrote:

    >> If you (not *we*) want to port something port it and let us know when
    >> it's done.

    > sorry, it my mistake, i do not mean that all community should go
    > and port GCC
    >
    >> The pattern of "I've just downloaded Plan9 and I want my old
    >> tools" is
    >> very common and we just kind of ignore them except for the anti-
    >> GNU
    >> troll responses.

    > Ok, i already figure out this. I was not right(?) when start this
    > discussion if there is no C++ in Plan9, that there are some reasons
    > for that
    >
    > Thanks to all, i'm really sorry if i disturb anyone with this
    > discasion ))
    >
    >
    > 2008/2/4, Alf :
    >> Hi,
    >>> if we
    >>> couldn't port GCC because it very big job (any other reason?), maybe
    >>> we could port some other compiler with liberal enough licence?
    >>>
    >>>

    >> If you (not *we*) want to port something port it and let us know when
    >> it's done.
    >> The process goes like this :
    >> "I've done some working code for my XXXX C++ port, it's in my
    >> contrib directory if someone wants to have a go with it"
    >>
    >>> I'm asking because C++ is very popular language,

    >> This is Plan 9, popularity isn't very high on the list.
    >>
    >> The reason there is no native C++ compiler is because of it's
    >> *lack* of
    >> popularity in the Plan 9 community, both historically and currently.
    >>
    >> The pattern of "I've just downloaded Plan9 and I want my old
    >> tools" is
    >> very common and we just kind of ignore them except for the anti-
    >> GNU
    >> troll responses.
    >>
    >> You'll (eventually) notice that *most* of the long time Plan 9 users
    >> don't even join in the discussion, no doubt smiling a "seen it all
    >> before" smile before pressing Del
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>



  6. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    In article <47A6EE79.4070009@proweb.co.uk>, <9fans@cse.psu.edu> wrote:
    > > because something had to be used to compile Plan 9 itself, etc and I

    >figure it's not being done as a cross-compiler.
    >
    >I'm sorry my new friend but I think that's the funniest 9fans post I've
    >ever seen, how ... but .... surely you ..... aw come on
    >
    >To redeem myself I shall offer this link to one of the other C compilers
    >that exist in the world :
    >http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/1/2c


    It might be funny but unfortunately does not address the point
    I made from the point that Steve made. Anyway, that aside,
    I'm glad to see that link/list. Problem is that when I tried to look
    a few months ago (actually a few times but also one time from a query
    from Steve in email about Comeau C++ on Plan 9) the, um, funny, thing
    is that it was -- or at least seemed -- pretty prominent on the site
    that gcc was available for Plan 9. Perhaps due to my unfamiliarity with
    the Plan 9 site, I could not easily find the above link, despite feeling
    that I was surprised that the Plan 9 team either used gcc or switched
    to it.... not that they couldn't do so, but it seemed to me that when
    I originally heard of Plan 9 years ago it was using their own compiler
    and I was surprised to feel that wasn't necessarily the case anymore.
    Obviously the link corrects that thinking, thanks.
    --
    Greg Comeau / 4.3.9 with C++0xisms now in beta!
    Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
    World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
    Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

  7. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    In article ,
    Filipp Andronov <9fans@cse.psu.edu> wrote:
    >Hmmm, may i ask a very stupid question?
    >I have working with GCC C++ compiler and MS C++ compiler, and i
    >suppose that there are another compilers in the world...
    >
    >But i don't known any other free compiler (yeah, MS compiler is not
    >free, but in russia all MS software IS free ). So question is, if we
    >couldn't port GCC because it very big job (any other reason?), maybe
    >we could port some other compiler with liberal enough licence?


    That's part of what Steve was saying.

    And my question remains about gcc, either there is or there
    isn't a port for Plan 9, but it seems clear to me that there
    is one, so why do people keep saying not? Or is it that for
    some reason on the C language part is operational?

    >I'm asking because C++ is very popular language, it have some nice
    >benefits (is that word right here?), and there are many software that
    >was developed on it.
    >Of course C++ could be very ugly in some situations, but Object
    >Oriented model is very powerful and C++ is "standard" language for it.
    >So modern operation system with out C++ support is something...unusual
    >(i don't know right word in english, that describe what i want to say
    >)?


    Every language has problems. Anyway, there should be no inherent
    technical gotchas with C++ and Plan 9 that I know of, that is,
    as compared with any other feasible/reasonable/etc OS.

    >2008/2/4, Uriel :
    >> And when you thought it couldn't get better, from the top of
    >> http://www.comeaucomputing.com
    >>
    >> "Bursting With So Much Language Support It Hurts!"
    >>
    >> Most fortune-worthy line ever.
    >>
    >> uriel
    >>
    >> On Feb 4, 2008 12:52 PM, wrote:
    >> > > because something had to be used to compile Plan 9 itself, etc and I
    >> > figure it's not being done as a cross-compiler.
    >> >
    >> > I'm sorry my new friend but I think that's the funniest 9fans post I've
    >> > ever seen, how ... but .... surely you ..... aw come on
    >> >
    >> > To redeem myself I shall offer this link to one of the other C compilers
    >> > that exist in the world :
    >> > http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/1/2c
    >> >
    >> >

    >>



    --
    Greg Comeau / 4.3.9 with C++0xisms now in beta!
    Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
    World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
    Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

  8. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    On Feb 6, 2008 4:53 AM, Greg Comeau wrote:
    > And my question remains about gcc, either there is or there
    > isn't a port for Plan 9, but it seems clear to me that there
    > is one, so why do people keep saying not?


    There is a port of GCC, but it's not maintained much and reports vary
    on how stable it is. Also, 9c-produced 'object files' (basically
    compressed assembler code) are incompatible with GCC's object files,
    so any libraries that must be shared need to be recompiled.

    A '9c++' (actually 2c++, 8c++, kc++, &c.) that compiled through C,
    using the Plan 9 C compilers, should have no problems -- so long as
    the front-end doesn't rely on GCCisms or the nuttier (in the Plan 9
    viewpoint) misfeatures of C99 like dynamically-sized arrays.

    --Joel

  9. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    On Feb 6, 2008 8:11 PM, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
    > On Feb 6, 2008 4:53 AM, Greg Comeau wrote:
    > > And my question remains about gcc, either there is or there
    > > isn't a port for Plan 9, but it seems clear to me that there
    > > is one, so why do people keep saying not?

    >
    > There is a port of GCC, but it's not maintained much and reports vary
    > on how stable it is. Also, 9c-produced 'object files' (basically
    > compressed assembler code) are incompatible with GCC's object files,
    > so any libraries that must be shared need to be recompiled.


    I have yet to see that anyone (that is not dead) has ever got the GCC
    port to work at all. (Fgb spent lots of time trying to get it to go,
    but to no avail).

    That it is (was?) linked from the website seems to add more confusion
    than anything else.

    uriel

    P.S.: I want to make clear that I have a deep respect for dhog and his
    work, it is quite impressive what he managed to do, specially having
    in mind hideousness and painfulness of the task in question.

  10. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    The recent flame I mean, discussion on GCC was started with my
    futile attempts to compile that bloke. However, I no longer think we
    need anything POSIX, GNU, or X11, as Plan 9 already comes with most,
    if not all, of the libraries we need:
    - rio(1) replaces readline (especially hold mode)
    - libdraw, etc. replaces libX/liboldX/etc.
    - libcontrol replaces GTK+
    - libthread replaces pthreads
    and countless more. However, I doubt other systems will want these
    libraries, or use plan9ports internally, so GCC will still be
    victorious in most situations.

    The stab it with their steely knives,
    But they just canít kill the beast.
    Either Don Henley, Glenn Frey or Don Felder

    On Feb 6, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Uriel wrote:

    > On Feb 6, 2008 8:11 PM, Joel C. Salomon
    > wrote:
    >> On Feb 6, 2008 4:53 AM, Greg Comeau wrote:
    >>> And my question remains about gcc, either there is or there
    >>> isn't a port for Plan 9, but it seems clear to me that there
    >>> is one, so why do people keep saying not?

    >>
    >> There is a port of GCC, but it's not maintained much and reports vary
    >> on how stable it is. Also, 9c-produced 'object files' (basically
    >> compressed assembler code) are incompatible with GCC's object files,
    >> so any libraries that must be shared need to be recompiled.

    >
    > I have yet to see that anyone (that is not dead) has ever got the GCC
    > port to work at all. (Fgb spent lots of time trying to get it to go,
    > but to no avail).
    >
    > That it is (was?) linked from the website seems to add more confusion
    > than anything else.
    >
    > uriel
    >
    > P.S.: I want to make clear that I have a deep respect for dhog and his
    > work, it is quite impressive what he managed to do, specially having
    > in mind hideousness and painfulness of the task in question.



  11. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    In article <7871fcf50802061111y1da6442dn3e42ca30288b704e@mail. gmail.com>,
    Joel C. Salomon <9fans@cse.psu.edu> wrote:
    >On Feb 6, 2008 4:53 AM, Greg Comeau wrote:
    >> And my question remains about gcc, either there is or there
    >> isn't a port for Plan 9, but it seems clear to me that there
    >> is one, so why do people keep saying not?

    >
    >There is a port of GCC, but it's not maintained much and reports vary
    >on how stable it is.


    Ok, thanks. That's a very different statement than what seemed
    to be being said, at least recently said.

    >Also, 9c-produced 'object files' (basically
    >compressed assembler code) are incompatible with GCC's object files,
    >so any libraries that must be shared need to be recompiled.


    That's not so rare as to be a Plan 9 specific problem,
    although I agree, it has issues. Anyway, thanks again for
    the clarifications.

    >A '9c++' (actually 2c++, 8c++, kc++, &c.) that compiled through C,
    >using the Plan 9 C compilers, should have no problems -- so long as
    >the front-end doesn't rely on GCCisms or the nuttier (in the Plan 9
    >viewpoint) misfeatures of C99 like dynamically-sized arrays.


    That c/w/ould make sense if it does/can not support those.
    (We can handle both, at least on some other OSes, so this
    could be interesting.)
    --
    Greg Comeau / 4.3.9 with C++0xisms now in beta!
    Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
    World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
    Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

  12. Re: [9fans] A newbie question...

    On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 11:30:03AM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    >
    > As another example, check out graphviz. From version 1 to version 2
    > (I think) they moved from a custom configurator to the autotools.
    > Beside totally losing Plan 9 portability in the bargain, it is my
    > impression that they spent more effort on the autotools details than
    > in improving graphviz itself.


    Of course they did, that's what most FOSS projects do:

    1. Find a perfectly good software package that has been "stuck" in
    version 1.x for years (meaning it's been debugged and already
    does everything it needs to do)
    2. Register a SourceForge page for the "next generation" version
    3. Replace the working build system with autoconf crap
    4. Release the new package as version 2.0 (meaning 2.0 times the size)

    And of course:

    5. Release version 2.1, now with ANSIfied color output!

    Now you too can get the street cred of "maintaining" a well-known software
    package without understanding anything about the original code.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3