This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC/Patch for PR fortran/17675
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>, sje at cup dot hp dot com
- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 19:54:12 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFC/Patch for PR fortran/17675
- References: <200412210034.QAA23042@hpsje.cup.hp.com> <28788957.1103664946726.JavaMail.firstname.lastname@example.org> <41D01A4C.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20050101004847.GA14005@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
On Dec 31, 2004, at 7:48 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 01:18:20AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
We can't guarantee delivery or timely fixing of bugs.
Indeed. But I was under the impression you Fortran folks were
bugs on x86 lately, while this big regression was plaguing the RISC
That's a very unfair accessment of the last several patches
I've submitted! The problem is we have only Paul Brook, who
approves patches to fortran, and he appears swamped with ARM
issues. This isn't an indictment against Paul. It's a simple
fact of life that he has few cycles to burn.
I also build gfortran of amd64 and i386 FreeBSD, so I'm
acutely aware of 64-bit problems.
And I build it on ppc-darwin all the time and submit patches too
so the argument about RISC world is false. Also IIRC ARM is fine