OCamlot - (Untitled post)

Yeah, there are forks of LLVM though, right? Maybe that's the way to go? Maybe not super diverse, but better than nothing? I'm hardly an expert so much as an onlooker in such realms, but: There's llvm-mos (which has the 6502 and even the friggin HuC6280 [wow!] as targets), so I can't really imagine how deprecating MC68k support would be sane in contrast; albeit maybe it should live on in a fork like llvm-mos? I'm just spitballin here, but from my vantage, the MC6800 and MOS6502 are already so interrelated that llvm-mos might be the best place for MC680x0 targets to thrive relative to like, anything that LLVM mainline should consider in active development? LLVM didn't get started until 2000 and I am hard pressed to think of anyone who was using MC68k as a daily driver at that point (even weirdos such as I, who still has my Amiga 1200 amidst my prized material possessions). Sure, OpenBSD and some other outliers (Hi NetBSD!) were still targeting Amigas and even some MC880000 systems circa 2000, but IIRC they were doing so with GCC at the time, LLVM was way too new in 2000 (heck remember when TenDRA seemed as if it might be a viable alternative to GCC? It wasn't much later than that, but here I am getting all nostalgic.) Meanwhile, I'm still trying to wrap my head around how some have been supposedly been using Zig with llvm-mos (you do you I guess, whoever you are), but then the other day someone else had a YouTube video saying how their preferred Zig program couldn't be built on a dual G5 they bought for $20? (like, wtfh!? IBM still makes newer Power9/10/11 systems I think; though I guess G5s are very long in the tooth, how are folks building software for older PPC systems? I wouldn't know without digging some PowerBooks out of storage and giving them a whirl I guess.). That word "valuable" is so loaded; but I certainly understand wanting to move the needle forward even if some seem stuck (or more rarely, doing revitalizing retrodev) in the past. But there's also the part of me which remembers: MC68k is so nice at the asm level, like 6502 before it. C seems overwrought for those systems, to me at least. C felt really bloated to me on such things back then (I am still dumb founded by how expensive and slow Apple and NeXT MC68k systems seemed relative to alternatives [not Intel, more like CBM and SGI and Sun] in that era); and when I look back at how much simpler C was then relative to LLVM/Clang and such now I just wonder if all software is doomed to have the "Tetsuo turns into a giant baby scene from AKIRA" growth pattern? I really don't think it should be that way, yet here we are anyway. ;-/ CC: <a href="https://social.treehouse.systems/users/dysfun" class="u-url mention">@dysfun@treehouse.systems</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/users/mcc" class="u-url mention">@mcc@mastodon.social</a>