This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Regressions in 3.2
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "David S. Miller" <davem at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at" <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "lucier at math dot purdue dot edu" <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:45:23 -0700
- Subject: Re: Regressions in 3.2
--On Tuesday, May 14, 2002 05:45:16 PM -0700 "David S. Miller"
> From: Mark Mitchell <email@example.com>
> Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 10:18:12 -0700
> Let's make this clear: although the mainline is an appropriate place
> for new, sometimes destabilizing work, it's not a place for
> regressions. If you've made a mess, it's your obligation to go clean
> up your mess as quickly as possible.
> %99 of these problems existed long before DFA or any of the other
> bigger changes have gone in.
That may well be; I don't mean to cast aspersions on any particular
patch or patches. It's a general comment.
> I'm suspecting it is a bunch of "stuff that went into 3.1, but not
> into the mainline where we should fix it 'properly'" and the
> 'properly' bit has slipped through the cracks.
Could well be...
> Mark, it may be instructive for Jason or yourself to diff the branch
> c++ frontend with the mainline and look for anything that sticks out
> like a sore thumb. Just a suggestion..
Indeed. After 3.1 is out, I'll start on this kind of thing.
Mark Mitchell firstname.lastname@example.org
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com