Paul Vixie wrote:
> what i guess i need is some interns who want to work on "Common
> Modula-3" as a single-standard based on GCC4 with intent to make the
> backend part of GCC. (there's no formal application process for it
> yet, just send me some e-mail.)
Ken Rose <kenrose@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> That's a good idea, except we need a way for the adults to play too.
> You know - those of us who can contribute a few hours a week, but can't
> live on an intern's income...
i'm very sure that the current maintainer of PM3/CM3 would welcome all
help...
> Ah, heck. Let's start now. What are the points of incompatibility
> between PM3 and CM3, and how should they be resolved? What should be
> added to the language? What should be taken away?
....but since i believe that a "common" M3 would be controversial to many,
i
also therefore believe there is no way to get it done "volunteer-style."
we
either start up a standards organization with fees and voting and meetings
and delegates, like was done for the various ANSI-C's or the S-100 bus or
the
various PCI busses, or somebody Just Does It. lacking the means or
expertise
for the former, i'm leaning toward the latter.
i'd love to be found wrong on all counts.
--
Paul Vixie
|
