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: RFC: Why don't we stop the optimizer pipeline when errorcount > 0?

From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 14:47:53 -0500
Subject: Re: RFC: Why don't we stop the optimizer pipeline when errorcount > 0?
References: <200601091942.k09JgUWI016910@earth.phy.uc.edu> <200601091446.21469.dnovillo@redhat.com>

On Jan 9, 2006, at 2:46 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:

On Monday 09 January 2006 14:42, Andrew Pinski wrote:
the only passes which do run are cfg creation, expand, and maybe a
couple other simple ones.
I know that. It's expand the one bothering me. Are we issuing errors that late in the pipeline?

yes but we should not be but that is a different story and just because this was how GCC worked since 1987.

-- Pinski

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC: Why don't we stop the optimizer pipeline when errorcount > 0?
  - From: Mark Mitchell

References:
- Re: RFC: Why don't we stop the optimizer pipeline when errorcount > 0?
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: RFC: Why don't we stop the optimizer pipeline when errorcount > 0?
  - From: Diego Novillo

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