This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: reviewers for wide int.
- From: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- To: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck at naturalbridge dot com>
- Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 15:56:26 -0700
- Subject: Re: reviewers for wide int.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5356C2CF dot 20609 at naturalbridge dot com> <52e8015e-88aa-455c-aa48-a94659b8f30b at email dot android dot com> <5356C784 dot 1020706 at naturalbridge dot com>
On Apr 22, 2014, at 12:48 PM, Kenneth Zadeck <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> While of course one hopes that there will be no issues with wide-int, a
>>> change of this size will have some pain no matter how well we have
>>> tested it. Having three reviewers will assure problems are resolved
>> Works for me. I suppose this mainly covers wide-int.[CH], right?
> if you want to define it that narrowly you can. it really depends on how much help you want and how much you trust us not to go beyond what is reasonable. All three of us have been at this long enough to know when to ask for help.
There is a large class of bugs that can creep in due to the subtle change of interface from double-int to wide-int. These happen outside of the wide-int.[ch] code and seem statistically more likely by a large margin than bugs in wide-int.[ch]. The good news, resolving them is easy enough with side-by-side comparisons (say of dump files and .s files). Most of those fixes I’d expect to be trivial (for some definition of trivial).