On Sun, 18 Nov 2007, Robert Dewar wrote: | Richard Kenner wrote: | > > Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > > | > > | It's interestinng to note that in the Ada world, there is an ISO | > > | standard for plugins, which is compiler/vendor neutral (at least | > > | in theory, in practice there are some implementation dependencies). | > > | That's the ASIS interface (Ada Semantic Interface Specification). | > > | > > So, is it that plugins are good for Ada (and I presume the GNU Ada | > > front end) but not for GCC? | > | > Robert is using the word "plugin" differently. ASIS is an interface | > and a library. There are no plugins in the sense discussed here. He | > means it in a very generic sense, in the sense that we already have it | > for GCC. | | So I am not sure I understand Richard's points above, so let me be clear | about what ASIS is. | | It is a set of libraries, and a well defined API, that allows generic | tools to be written that have full access to the semantic information | discovered by the compiler. This API is fully documented and defined | in a compiler-neutral form.
Yes, I'm familiar with ASIS, ANNA, etc. And Yes, Kenner's point sound a bit strange to me, but then, this whole discussion seems so strange to me to have given the current situation in 2007. -- Gaby
