Messages in this thread | | | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM] | Date | Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:51:49 -0500 |
| |
On Thursday 26 June 2003 13:40, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 07:45:21PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > That's probably a good enough test case. Explain to me how your > > > support contracts are ever going to provide enough money to redo GCC or > > > build something equally substantial. > > > > [incremental changes given as example] > > Incremental changes != redo. Redo is a ~$10M project.
The Los Alamos National Laboratory have sponsored the work for a new hand-crafted recursive-descent C++ parser for GCC.
Apple contributed a precompiled header implementation for GCC.
Both of these are comple rewrites. Not incremental changes.
Claiming these are "incremental" is like claiming Linux is an incremental change to the AT&T Kernel... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |