[GCC-XML]Fwd: XML dumping and GraphViz/VCG in the GCC ast-optimizer-branch

James Michael DuPont mdupont777 at yahoo.com
Tue Oct 15 10:08:43 EDT 2002

For any of you interested in function bodies and low-level stuff.

The fight is on! 

No more BS from the gcc developers, they are just working on the stuff
that they are trying to forbid.  That is just Hypocrisy.

More to follow,

--- James Michael DuPont <mdupont777 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> From James Michael DuPont Tue Oct 15 07:00:36 2002
> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 07:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
> From: James Michael DuPont <mdupont777 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: XML dumping and GraphViz/VCG in the GCC ast-optimizer-branch
> To: gcc at gnu.org
> Dear GCC developers,
> I was really suprized and happy to see the patches applied to the 
> ast-optimizer-branch from Sebastian Pop. 
> His XML dumping of call graphs is very useful. 
> Can I take this as general acceptance of XML dumping in the gcc? 
> At least it has not been attacked or criticized on the mailling list.
> Also the dump-tree-dot module dumps into a format for the non-free
> software dot, a part of graphviz. I take this is an accepted practice
> of dumping tree structures for explict usage by non-free software? 
> I hope that this is an indication that there is no longer any policy
> problem of using the ast-dumps from the gcc by other free software
> modules? I mean if the output is meant for non-free software, then
> you
> must be happy to have this output used by free software.
> Or is the contents of the CVS not an indication of policy at all, 
> with the policy makers not enforcing them, and the cvs commiters not
> asking for permission?
> There have been many people who are interested in using the
> introspector for creating free software. I have been trying to
> convince
> people that it is better to not output asts to non-free software or
> xml. But if the gcc is accepting patches to do the same, then I would
> be silly not to follow suite. 
> In fact, I cannot see any real reason anymore to get stressed out
> about
> this issue at all. 
> We am going to be re-starting up the binary distribution of the
> patched
> gcc for full dumping of function bodies into xml and post processing
> in
> perl. I had taken them down out of respect to some or Also we we will
> be creating a local branch of the gcc ast-optimizer branch in the
> introspector.sf.net repository.
> My goal is to create a statically linked visualization and
> manipulation
> tool under the GPL by gluing togeather the components of the VCG,
> DIA, GCC and Perl. 
> The VCG is a GPLed software that provides similar functions to 
> GraphVis, In fact I have now gotten an "Un-Uglified" copy of the
> sources from the author, and will be pushing to get the Gcc users to
> switch over to use free software.
> Also I have planned out an exchange of the ast information via
> in-memory trees stored in the libxml2 dom structures. That would
> allow
> for the visualization tools to get a "Live feed" from the compiler as
> a
> push data feed. I hope that it will eliminate the need for external
> representation, in fact the entire system could be statically linked
> into one huge monolithic application. That would also include an
> embedded perl for a script interpreter.
> Anyway, we have many discussions about this issue on the list in the
> past, and I think this whole issue of external representation is
> really
> turning out to be a free-for-all where is it easier to ask for
> forgiveness then for permisison, not following any real guidelines.
> It
> is now time for me to get back in on this free-for-all, otherwise I
> will just be left out.
> Mike
> =====
> James Michael DuPont
> http://introspector.sourceforge.net/
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
> http://faith.yahoo.com

James Michael DuPont

Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More

More information about the gccxml mailing list