Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> Does GNU have a policy in place for supporting compilers?
Yes, and the policies are partially going in different directions:
1) GNU packages should help other GNU packages [1].
2) RMS occasionally reminds to focus the effort on GNU systems
and GCC (as opposed to e.g. clang).
> In the past I've seen it stated in terms of market share. ...
Market share is not a directly important criteria for what GNU packages
should support.
Regarding TinyCC, Luca Saiu (who is indirectly working on GNU poke and
GNU epsilon) reported a problem regarding the combination of Gnulib and
TinyCC. That's why I spent a bit of time to take a look.
> Maybe you should look at TinyCC usage before you decide to spend a lot of time
> on it.
You know how Gnulib development works: we spend, say, a week on portability
to FreeBSD, then don't do much for FreeBSD for a year or two, until we
get prompted by bug reports. Likewise for other OSes and for compilers.
TinyCC is not different. It got a bit of attention this week, and probably
none more for the rest of the year (unless the TinyCC developers make
a 1.0 release).
Bruno
[1] https://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.en.html
[2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2021-03/msg00011.html
