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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED.IIfIc3CB/+nKo+wKq8+a0g.user.gioia.aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada on Apple's new procesors
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 12:03:14 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <lybll7flvx.fsf@pushface.org>
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>
NNTP-Posting-Host: IIfIc3CB/+nKo+wKq8+a0g.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (darwin)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pBXWCJZlYeD13cem043vp7QmXu8=
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:59224
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

charlet@adacore.com writes:

>> > That's correct, there is no issue here. The GNAT LLVM compiler is a
>> > tool and is licensed under GPLv3, which is just fine and the proper
>> > license for a tool. The runtime which is linked with your
>> > executable comes from the gcc.gnu.org repository and contains the
>> > GCC RunTime exception license.
>> > 
>> 
>> Can you confirm that using FSF GNAT with GNAT-LLVM (GPLv3) does or
>> does not enable the IR clause in the GPLv3?
>
> It does not and in any case, invoking this clause is a red herring
> since as explained in the license, the concern and what's not allowed
> is using an intermediate representation and feed it to a proprietary
> (non-GPL-compatible) software to e.g. optimize it or further process
> it.

Optikos has (at last) made clear his concerns about this: if it is
indeed the case that Apple require App Store developers to deliver
bitcode for further proprietary optimizations then there might be an
issue.

Depends on whether LLVM IR (which I understand is logically equivalent
to bitcode) can count as target code? I've seen it described as LLVM
assembler ...