From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:a37:4903:: with SMTP id w3mr19802189qka.178.1593527703742;
        Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:2081:: with SMTP id y1mr17862205otq.114.1593527703388;
 Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rdfek4$17vt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=194.98.77.126; posting-account=VpkXKAoAAACJdJbPSrB2RRuO-i3D4Q8l
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.98.77.126
References: <4d9fa282-830d-42f7-a3bf-ba127cb2ad06o@googlegroups.com>
 <rcsmel$sdb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8332f305-299f-45d7-9f9d-2cad924b24d8o@googlegroups.com>
 <rctfip$1eel$1@gioia.aioe.org> <9d941aca-2eb6-4f35-a346-c290c4666bdfo@googlegroups.com>
 <rcu20d$199n$1@gioia.aioe.org> <f7150588-5593-4688-bb83-e8ec0fd71550o@googlegroups.com>
 <rd1sce$1c2t$1@gioia.aioe.org> <76def2a5-667c-4009-b3b9-f0cf1c13a51bo@googlegroups.com>
 <3b5b2360-684c-4149-8662-98b53319cf94o@googlegroups.com> <b35ac73b-6790-4e6b-ba1c-7dfb25af34fdo@googlegroups.com>
 <rdfek4$17vt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a432e928-3773-424f-84da-6abf5fe430e3o@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Ada on Apple's new procesors
From: charlet@adacore.com
Injection-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 14:35:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:59263
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> That is for uploading of GPL'd software to the app store, that is not
> what we are talking about here. This is a completely different matter.
>=20
> What we are talking about is whether the GNAT-LLVM backend violates the
> GPL IR clause, enacting it in the final binary.
>=20
> We need clarification on whether the translation from GCC's IR to LLVM's
> IR invokes this clause. I'm not sure if GNAT final IR before the
> GNAT-LLVM backend is GENERIC or GIMPLE.

GNAT LLVM doesn't use nor depend on GCC at all: it goes directly from the G=
NAT
tree to LLVM bitcode, there is never any GENERIC nor GIMPLE in sight by des=
ign
and never can be (unlike with the old DraggonEgg FWIW).

> I've had a quick look in GNAT-LLVM and I cannot see any flags enabling
> the output of GCC's IR, only LLVM's IR.

See above.

By the way the reason I haven't answered other messages is mainly because I=
 am not familiar with Apple's specific constraints here, so I'd rather not =
make any statement about them rather than making wrong statements and you s=
houldn't draw any conclusion from the fact that I haven't replied to some o=
f the messages in this thread.

Arno