Re: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM]

[Jesse Pollard]

On Thursday 26 June 2003 13:40, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 07:45:21PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > That's probably a good enough test case.  Explain to me how your
> > > support contracts are ever going to provide enough money to redo GCC or
> > > build something equally substantial.
> >
> > [incremental changes given as example]
>
> Incremental changes != redo.  Redo is a ~$10M project.

	The Los Alamos National Laboratory have sponsored the work for a new
	hand-crafted recursive-descent C++ parser for GCC.

	Apple contributed a precompiled header implementation for GCC.

Both of these are comple rewrites. Not incremental changes.

Claiming these are "incremental" is like claiming Linux is an incremental 
change to the AT&T Kernel...