[cfe-dev] Query: Is clang an "Apple product"?

[Sean Silva]

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2 October 2014 18:46, Robinson, Paul
>> <Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
>> > Apple delivers a version of clang (as part of Xcode?) and it's not
>> unheard
>> > of for a vendor to include proprietary changes (I don't know whether
>> Apple
>> > does this).  In that sense the clang-that-Apple-delivers could be
>> reasonably
>> > considered an "Apple product."
>>
>> In that sense, Sony, ARM and others also release LLVM based compilers.
>>
>> Every time I heard the phrase "LLVM is an Apple product" was in a
>> pejorative way to diminish the community value, mainly due to the
>> license being more "corporate friendly" than GPLv3.
>>
>
> The funny thing is that LLVM is sort of a "de facto copyleft" due to the
> fast development pace and lack of compatibility: every patch that isn't in
> the open source repo becomes a liability, eventually resulting in merge
> pain. Unlike the GPL though, if you really need it, you have the
> flexibility to keep it out-of-tree; but at a (not to be underestimated)
> cost in developer resources.
>

In case it wasn't clear, I meant this in the sense of "this arrangement
seems to be a nice balance which has kept the community thriving while
allowing/promoting corporate adoption".

-- Sean Silva


>
> -- Sean Silva
>
>
>>
>> Ideals and licenses apart, LLVM is an Apple/Google product as much as
>> GCC is a RedHat product, Linux is a RedHat/Intel product, etc, i.e.
>> not at all.
>>
>> cheers,
>> --renato
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20141002/a706e9bc/attachment.html>