This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: don't assume pointer cast to unsigned long is a valid initializer
On Mar 2, 2003, Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org> wrote:
> Yes, that's why you should never have committed the patch in the first
> place; those testers will need manual work to recover from your
> botched commit. The less time you take to fix the problem the smaller
> the possible impact.
Since the patch should not be modified anyway, how about removing it
now, so that nobody needs manual work while we discuss what the
correct testcase should look like?
Not that I agree with the policy of not modifying testcases. I agree
that adding new cases to a testcase should not be done, but preventing
modifications that are strict if-it-worked-before-it-will-still-work
is just silly. If we're to follow this procedure, let's just take the
testsuite out of CVS, since there's no benefit to be taken from CVS if
we're to rename tests whenever we modify them.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva at {redhat dot com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva at {lsd dot ic dot unicamp dot br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer