Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: GCC is 25 years old today Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:00:48 +0200 Organization: cbb software GmbH Lines: 34 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <12-03-056@comp.compilers> References: <12-03-051@comp.compilers> <12-03-053@comp.compilers> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com X-Trace: leila.iecc.com 1332773800 84595 64.57.183.58 (26 Mar 2012 14:56:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: GCC, history Posted-Date: 26 Mar 2012 10:56:40 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:523 On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 08:44:36 -0700, BGB wrote: > GCC showed up in various forms (such as DJGPP, and later Cygwin and > MinGW), and in not much time, most previously non-free compilers (MSVC, > Watcom, ...) became freely available as well. > > if not for GCC, maybe compilers would tend to still cost money? > either that, or maybe this trend was inevitable? It was. The software market was (and is) unregulated. The big software vendors were able to fund incredibly cost-intensive compiler development form sales of other, far less expensive to develop, software and services. This started a race to the bottom and, in the end, destroyed the whole market of compilers with all the compiler vendors who were not quick enough to diversify their business. Those who did, walked away anyway. Why would you keep an unprofitable department? You cannot yearn anything for compilers now. Consequently, there is no significant investments in compiler and language research, of which effect the author of the article observed as a "plateau." There is no mystery in it, no market means no progress. Academic research very soon became irrelevant without an input from the field, without industry hungry for fresh compiler developers. So, here we are. Was GCC responsible for that? No, its role was rather positive, to keep some least diversity of compilers, to serve as an epitaph on the tombstone... -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de