This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Fwd: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-08-09)]
- From: "Steven Bosscher" <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: "Janus Weil" <jaydub66 at googlemail dot com>
- Cc: "François-Xavier Coudert" <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, jaydub66 at gmail dot com
- Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:44:45 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Fwd: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-08-09)]
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Zo+ACidLhGfSzQnBxwZEwcb0CSv9HKdiwIw0XdB8vK+Y4icd4tSCwWnnO2DN01+M0Df2ZL1hbNxnig09URs4G9CLGKdKAlF3C4TbeSv+Hf2zjywemTxIkxQ3QknwJYGfdgNY+2G1nwDFHlcFQi0C7zHUYbGalD9BPwivp8DjxXA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ud++oiZlyfoZV+68f0cNSfYe1SugqtB82kUdbAZLyaxtguS2vkifL2nNcLRhf6xBPaDkfLTq5MFmhgPdY8RnojJUwbHq+1WqlCInEomyPB1h+Tnxu2ojNKpiZOI9iXo+eAeQWegu4otS8bhr8qcgIp+J3MLrjLglU1/d2ILpFyM=
- References: <46BBBF88.8030602@codesourcery.com> <19c433eb0708100418u729b337co6ff1ff6071d1f7f7@mail.gmail.com> <854832d40708111023jc2638bepa31477d70a6499e2@mail.gmail.com>
On 8/11/07, Janus Weil <jaydub66@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> since this patch on the PROCEDURE machinery that I'm working on is
> quite a big one, I'd propose to split it up into smaller chunks and
> commit them separately. It could easily be divided into three parts:
>
> * ABSTRACT interfaces
> * simple PROCEDURE declarations
> * PROCEDURE pointers
Excelent.
> So, what do you think of this plan? Do you think it makes sense?
> If yes, people could already start reviewing the first patch, and I'd
> soon send more details on part two.
There are examples in the history of GCC where features were included
as experimental. I'm guessing parts 2 and 3 are front-end only? If so,
I'd suggest you do the following:
1. Post whatever you have now for the three parts, as parts. This will
allow people to go over the code you already have. As you said, this
usually shortens the review cycle when you later post the patches for
inclusion ;-)
2. Make a problems list, i.e. what are you currently having problems
with? (e.g. IIUC you had some trouble figuring out how to build tree
types for function??)
3. Try to finish parts 1 and 2 before the end of August, and post them
for inclusion. You could then also post the work-in-progress patch you
might have for part 3.
I'd "hide" the features implemented by part 1 and 2 behind a flag,
say, -fexperimental-features or whatever.
Gr.
Steven