To avoid some linking errors

[Brad Roberts]

On 10/30/2012 7:46 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:51:34AM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2012-10-30 02:58, Brad Roberts wrote:
> [...]
>>> today:
>>>   compiler invokes tools and just passes on output
>>>
>>> ideal (_an_ ideal, don't nitpick):
>>>   compiler invokes tool which returns structured output and uses that
>>>
>>> intermediate that's likely easier to achieve:
>>>   compiler invokes script that invokes tool (passing args) and fixes
>>> output to match structured output
>>
>> Even better, in my opinion: Both the linker and compiler is built
>> as a library. The compiler just calls a function from the linker
>> library, like any other function, to do the linking. The linker uses
>> the appropriate exception handling mechanism as any other function
>> would. No need for tools calling each other and parsing output data.
> [...]
> 
> +1. This is 2012, we have developed the concept of libraries, why are we
> still trying to parse output between two tools (compiler & linker) that
> are so closely intertwined? Not the mention the advantages of having the
> compiler and linker as a library: reusability in IDEs, adaptability to
> *runtime* compilation, and a host of other powerful usages.
> 
> 
> T
> 

I'm all for idealistic views, but neither of those matches reality in any meaningful way.  What I outlined is actually
practical.