Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 18:39:24 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: ObjectiveC Message-ID: <20021128233924.GA6179@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 09:27:52AM -0600, Dockeen wrote: >"Well this needs to be integrated INTO gcc" > >Uhhh, only one problem with this statement, its not right. Going to the gcc >web site, >I find: > >"GCC is the GNU Compiler Collection, which currently contains front ends >for C, C++, Objective-C, Fortran, Java, and Ada" > >Which is consistent with discussions I had on another board with a developer >that uses ObjectiveC. > >Check out the gcc sites: >http://gcc.gnu.org/ > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/ > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/ Yep, these are all fascinating arguments. However, I'm not going to be including Objective-C into gcc. I will be breaking out things into different packages at some point as soon as I get motivated to do so. It is certainly not impossible for someone to build their own Objective C package and I certainly wouldn't object to someone else doing it. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/