Any plans to integrate just binutils‑gdb into GCC?

[Arsen Arsenović]

unlvsur unlvsur via Gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

>   2.
> Hard to make changes across both binutils-gdb and GCC. And this has been proven
> that LLVM now makes changes much faster than GCC for adding features. There are
> many other reasons why LLVM moves faster (such as cross compiling does not need
> a seperate $target-gcc ), however, that is an important one.

The reason is probably more than LLVM has many times more developers.

>   3.
> Confusing. People often only build cross compilers for binutils-gdb, when they often need to build it for native compilers too.
>   4.
> Hard for binutils-gdb and gcc to use latest C++ version compared to LLVM.

What?  This is unrelated.  In fact, GDB uses a higher C++ version than
GCC does for it source code.

>   5.
> LLVM provides much more tools than binutils-gdb + GCC combines. Without putting them together, a lot of tools are simply impossible.
>   6.
> Lack of important modern targets support for gcc/binutils-gdb. No android, no windows on arm, no mac, no wasm. One reason is exactly they need to submit mailing patches to both of them, that is extremely annoying and often breaks things across projects

No, that's not the reason.  See above.
-- 
Arsen Arsenović
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 430 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20260723/38dff568/attachment-0001.sig>