This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?


Scott Robert Ladd wrote:

To which I would reply: Why should the National Labs support a software project without some sense that it is viable?

Yes, but whether it is viable depends on funding. It is a mistake to simply go around and look at what is out there for free, and conclude that this is a correct indicator of what might be available if a project is funded at an appropriate level.


If there is not intention for tree-ssa to become mainline, it would be pointless to spend money on it, now wouldn't it?

Not at all, our customers frequently pay us to do development on features that everyone agrees would be nice to have, but which are not about to appear without funding. It would be even more pointless to spend money if spending money did NOT have a useful positive effect!


Thankfully, others have indeed confirmed that tree-ssa is destined for a public debut.

Well of course that is the intention. The people working on this (volunteers and companies alike) are not doing it for their amusement. They are doing it because they think it will be effective.


As I said, it is a catch-22; The folks at the national labs need confidence in the practical reality of gfortran before being willing to fund it

Yes, of course. That's why you negotiate a contract with specific performance and payments.


while the GCC developers refuse to commit to gfortran's realization without funding.

Well "the GCC developers" is a bit of an amorphous concept, but most certainly the companies intersted will be willing to make a commitment prior to actual funding. It's called a proposal :-)


The twain will never meet if both parties remain in their individual corners. Thus it was my goal to nudge the two parties toward each other, first by getting a sense of the community support for tree-ssa and gfortran.

You are creating a conflict that simply does not exist. I really think your "nudging" is mis-directed here. The National Lab should put out a tender for proposals. Let those making the proposals figure out a sense
of community support, that's their job.


You are asking them to evaluate a theoretical situation (your "changed picture") without any data to support it. How do they know that providing money will improve gfortran development? If you don't give any estimates or answers under current circumstances, how do they know if their investment is effective?

No, I am asking them to evaluate (one or more) commercial proposals. In
evaluating such proposals (something that is done every day, and indeed I cannot imagine anyone spending money without this kind of evaluation),
they will take many things into account (credibility of the company, track record, expertise of those involved, proposed costs and time scales etc.)


I don't see why this is such a puzzle, it is the way that projects like this always proceed.

Robert Dewar




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