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: Criteria for GCC 4.0


kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) writes:

> phil@jaj.com (Phil Edwards)  wrote on 02.06.04 in <20040602190903.GA29825@disaster.jaj.com>:
>
>> I'm not arguing for /never/ having a 4.0 release (although others do take
>> that position, and it's a reasonable one).
>
> I'll say here that from where I sit, that doesn't strike me as  
> particularly reasonable. More like the opposite.

It follows logically from the position that a 4.0 version number would
only be justified by actions we would never take.

I had considerable difficulty thinking of changes to GCC that would
justify a 4.0 version number to me.  Here are two (and I hope everyone
agrees that we'd never do either):

 - Dropping support for the C language (because everyone uses C++
   anyway)

 - Redesigning the machine description language, only updating the 
   x86 backend to match, then doing a release before anyone has had
   a chance to update other backends.

And for the record, I now think the 2.95->3.0 version number bump was
*only* justified in order to extract ourselves from the corner we'd
painted ourselves into because EGCS internally considered itself to be
2.9[01].

zw

Please DO NOT cc: me on replies.


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