Re: Converting the gcc backend to a library? > Is the gcc development team interested in one or two of these
> developments if they were done right?

Even though I cannot speak for the team (just for myself), I think it
is a safe assumption that the answer is "yes". The critical matter is
that these changes (like any other) have to be done "right": they
should be well-documented, do not interfere with "normal" operation,
be maintainable, etc.

For step 2, it is not all that clear to me that the best solution is
to pack the globals into data structures, as you then have to pass the
pointer to the globals around from function to function. That would be
a significant change, and unnecessary for stand-alone operation.

Of course, if you can arrange to provide additional advantages for
stand-alone operation as well (eg. compiling multiple files in a
single cc1/cc1plus/f771/etc invocation), then that might provide the
rationale for an even larger change.