This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>
Cc: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:10:30 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0608250628540.5482-100000@www.eyesopen.com> <44EF1D67.502@codesourcery.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608251757460.4573@nyjnma.fhfr.qr>

Richard Guenther wrote:

Sure - I'm usually hoping to bypass the being-a-regression requirement
for mainline for wrong-code bugfixes like this one.

I haven't looked at this particular patch.

In general, I do think that making an exception for serious wrong-code regressions affecting major applications on major platforms is reasonable: just because we never correctly implemented "1 + 1", doesn't mean it wouldn't be incredibly lame to ship a compiler that generated wrong code in that case. We've historically made exceptions for things like wrong code in the Linux kernel. That's not a blank check to include all wrong-code fixes.

Thanks,

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796
  - From: Roger Sayle
- Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796
  - From: Richard Guenther

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]