RE: 3.2 and 3.3 release questions

["BONNER,MATT (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <matt_bonner at hp dot com>]

Hallo Gerald,

Thanks for the fast response!

Thank you for updating the web page, it looks fine now.  If you
want a nitpick, the text in footnote 1 should read "Note that no
distinction is made between patches that are themselves buggy
and patches that expose latent bugs elsewhere in the compiler."

To be clear, the way that sentence is written, it should use "that"
instead of "which" and there is no need to put "latent" in quotes.
You only need "which" when introducing a dependent clause (usually
with commas) like "My house, which is blue, is on the south side of
a quiet street."  I'm betting that note was written by one of my
fellow Americans--we always get that wrong!  :-)

Thank you also for the information on the ABI for 3.2.x and 3.3.x.
Can you point me to any document that talks about the details of
the changes?

best regards,
Matt

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gerald Pfeifer [mailto:pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at]
>> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 3:16 AM
>> To: BONNER,MATT (HP-Vancouver,ex1)
>> Cc: gcc@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: 3.2 and 3.3 release questions
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, BONNER,MATT (HP-Vancouver,ex1) wrote:
>> > Since I'm sure your time for Q&A is limited, here's the 
>> short version:
>> >
>> > 1. Is the ABI stable as of 3.2 or are more changes planned?
>> 
>> If you ask whether the ABI will be unchanged between 3.2, 3.2.1,
>> and 3.2.2, the answer is Yes.
>> 
>> > 2. Are 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 releases still planned?
>> 
>> 3.2.1 for sure, 3.2.2 possibly (probably depending on the 
>> actual release
>> dates of 3.2.1 and 3.3.)
>> 
>> > 3. Does 3.3 change the ABI from 3.2?
>> 
>> It's my understanding that 3.3 will be ABI-compatible with 
>> 3.2 either a)
>> out of the box, or b) by provding a flag which requests this 
>> compliance.
>> 
>> > With the apparently fairly stable release of 3.2, we are looking at
>> > migrating again.  My first and main question is "what is the plan
>> > with respect to the ABI?"  Is it now hoped to be stable, or are
>> > further changes planned?
>> 
>> We are, unfortunately, aware of several problems in GCC 3.2 
>> which already
>> have been fixed on mainline (which will become GCC 3.3). 
>> These fixed are
>> keyed to an internal flag, but as far as I know it has not yet been
>> decided what the default setting of that flag will be in GCC 3.3.
>> 
>> > As a secondary question, are 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 still 
>> planned?  The web
>> > page claims a Sep 15 2002 release for 3.2.1, but I see 
>> only a dubious
>> > mention of it on http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.2/changes.html , where
>> > first the page says it's about 3.2 and then says it's about 3.2.1.
>> 
>> This I'll shortly adress both issues by updating that page. 3.2.1 has
>> not been released yet.
>> 
>> > If any of these questions are covered on web pages I 
>> should have read,
>> > by all means point me at them and I'll try to read more 
>> carefully next
>> > time.
>> 
>> If you have any further questions (or updates/patches for 
>> the web page),
>> please do not hesitate!
>> 
>> Gerald
>> -- 
>> Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at 
>> http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/
>>