PATCH: gcc-3.0/criteria.html

[Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>]

These are actually two patches: 

 . The first contains minor markup changes.
   Tables three and four look better now, at least with Netscape and IMO.
 . The second fixes a couple of minor markup bugs.
   The page now validates as HTML 4.0.

Mark, I went ahead and installed both, as they did not change the
contents of that page...

Gerald

Index: criteria.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-3.0/criteria.html,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -c -3 -p -r1.6 criteria.html
*** criteria.html	2000/05/16 16:57:01	1.6
--- criteria.html	2000/07/13 13:36:03
*************** different programming languages.</p>
*** 178,184 ****
  
  <table align="center">
  <caption>Integration Tests</caption>
! <tr><th>Name<th>Language<th>Version<th>Source URL
  <tr><td><a href="http://www.kernel.org">Linux kernel</a>
      <td>C
      <td>2.2.14
--- 178,187 ----
  
  <table align="center">
  <caption>Integration Tests</caption>
! <tr><th>Name
!     <th>Language
!     <th>Version
!     <th>Source URL
  <tr><td><a href="http://www.kernel.org">Linux kernel</a>
      <td>C
      <td>2.2.14
*************** previous releases.  Therefore, we will u
*** 248,254 ****
  for measuring code quality:</p>
  
  <table align="center">
! <tr><th>Name<th>Language<th>Source URL</ht>
  <tr><td>gzip<td>C
      <td><a href="ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gzip/gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz">
          gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz</a>
--- 251,257 ----
  for measuring code quality:</p>
  
  <table align="center">
! <tr><th align=left>Name<th align=left>Language<th align=left>Source URL</ht>
  <tr><td>gzip<td>C
      <td><a href="ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gzip/gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz">
          gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz</a>
*************** cost.</p>
*** 290,302 ****
  <p>In order to measure compile-time performance, we will use the
  following unit tests:
  <table>
! <tr><th>Name<th>Language<th>Source<th>Flags<th>Comments
  <tr><td>insn-attrtab.c<td>C<td>
      <td>-O2
!     <td><p>This file contains a large machine-generated switch
!            statement.  This file is a reasonable benchmark for 
! 	   testing flow optimizations and for handling large 
! 	   functions.</p>
  <tr><td><td>C++
  <tr><td><td>Fortran
  <tr><td><td>Java
--- 293,308 ----
  <p>In order to measure compile-time performance, we will use the
  following unit tests:
  <table>
! <tr><th align=left>Name
!     <th align=left>Language
!     <th align=left>Source
!     <th align=left>Flags
!     <th align=left>Comments
  <tr><td>insn-attrtab.c<td>C<td>
      <td>-O2
!     <td>This file contains a large machine-generated switch
!         statement; it is a reasonable benchmark for testing flow
!         optimizations and for handling large functions.
  <tr><td><td>C++
  <tr><td><td>Fortran
  <tr><td><td>Java



Index: criteria.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-3.0/criteria.html,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -c -3 -p -r1.7 criteria.html
*** criteria.html	2000/07/13 13:36:23	1.7
--- criteria.html	2000/07/13 13:42:43
*************** answering questions and reviewing patche
*** 132,154 ****
  
  <p>There are GCC front-ends for many different languages.  However, in
  this release, only the behavior of front-ends for the following
! languages will be considered part of the release criteria:
  <ul>
  <li>C
  <li>C++
  <li>Fortran
  <li>Java
  </ul>
- </p>
  
  <p>The following languages will be supported by the release, but their
  behavior will not be a primary consideration in determining whether or
! not to ship a particular release candidate:
  <ul>
  <li>Chill
  <li>Objective-C
  </ul>
! In particular, no application testing, code quality, or compile-time
  performance testing will be required for these languages.  However,
  the regression testing criteria documented below will apply to these
  languages, except Chill, for which no regression tests are
--- 132,155 ----
  
  <p>There are GCC front-ends for many different languages.  However, in
  this release, only the behavior of front-ends for the following
! languages will be considered part of the release criteria:</p>
  <ul>
  <li>C
  <li>C++
  <li>Fortran
  <li>Java
  </ul>
  
  <p>The following languages will be supported by the release, but their
  behavior will not be a primary consideration in determining whether or
! not to ship a particular release candidate:</p>
! 
  <ul>
  <li>Chill
  <li>Objective-C
  </ul>
! 
! <p>In particular, no application testing, code quality, or compile-time
  performance testing will be required for these languages.  However,
  the regression testing criteria documented below will apply to these
  languages, except Chill, for which no regression tests are
*************** previous releases.  Therefore, we will u
*** 251,257 ****
  for measuring code quality:</p>
  
  <table align="center">
! <tr><th align=left>Name<th align=left>Language<th align=left>Source URL</ht>
  <tr><td>gzip<td>C
      <td><a href="ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gzip/gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz">
          gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz</a>
--- 252,260 ----
  for measuring code quality:</p>
  
  <table align="center">
! <tr><th align=left>Name
!     <th align=left>Language
!     <th align=left>Source URL
  <tr><td>gzip<td>C
      <td><a href="ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gzip/gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz">
          gzip-1.2.4a.tar.gz</a>
*************** little precedent for the behavior of the
*** 268,279 ****
  functional completeness and correctness are still more important than
  optimization.</p>
  
! <a>In addition to the above benchmarks, the behavior of real programs
  should be considered as well.  For that reason, the behavior of the
  elliptic curve integer factorization program <a
  href="ftp://ftp.loria.fr/pub/loria/eureca/tmp/GMP-ECM/ecm4c.c">ecm4c.c</a>,
  which uses GNU mp, will be considered part of the release
! criteria.</a>
  
  <p>A release candidate will be deemed unacceptable if the performance
  of the generated code is not at least as good as that of GCC 2.95.2 on
--- 271,282 ----
  functional completeness and correctness are still more important than
  optimization.</p>
  
! <p>In addition to the above benchmarks, the behavior of real programs
  should be considered as well.  For that reason, the behavior of the
  elliptic curve integer factorization program <a
  href="ftp://ftp.loria.fr/pub/loria/eureca/tmp/GMP-ECM/ecm4c.c">ecm4c.c</a>,
  which uses GNU mp, will be considered part of the release
! criteria.</p>
  
  <p>A release candidate will be deemed unacceptable if the performance
  of the generated code is not at least as good as that of GCC 2.95.2 on
*************** additional optimizations and additional 
*** 291,297 ****
  cost.</p>
  
  <p>In order to measure compile-time performance, we will use the
! following unit tests:
  <table>
  <tr><th align=left>Name
      <th align=left>Language
--- 294,300 ----
  cost.</p>
  
  <p>In order to measure compile-time performance, we will use the
! following unit tests:</p>
  <table>
  <tr><th align=left>Name
      <th align=left>Language
*************** following unit tests:
*** 307,313 ****
  <tr><td><td>Fortran
  <tr><td><td>Java
  </table>
- </p>
  
  <p>In addition to these unit tests, we will measure the time and peak
  memory usage used when building the entire GNU Emacs distribution with
--- 310,315 ----
*************** than 15%, or if the peak memory usage ex
*** 318,325 ****
  more than 25%, that candidate will be deemed unacceptable.</p>
  
  <h2>Open Issues</h2>
  
- The following issues are as of yet unresolved:
  <ul>
  <li>What integration tests should be used for Fortran and Java?
  <li>What versions of HPUX and AIX should we use as primary platforms?
--- 320,328 ----
  more than 25%, that candidate will be deemed unacceptable.</p>
  
  <h2>Open Issues</h2>
+ 
+ <p>The following issues are as of yet unresolved:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>What integration tests should be used for Fortran and Java?
  <li>What versions of HPUX and AIX should we use as primary platforms?