This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC needs YOU!
- From: Ali Abdul Ghani <blade dot vp2020 at gmail dot com>
- To: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 12:29:19 -0700
- Subject: Re: GCC needs YOU!
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAESRpQBS_74aXnHX5WLcZWPO8zKC_ZyW_yqxveN2AW2BjO2w+A at mail dot gmail dot com>
gcc Became very bad
gcc Became the slower and more errors
Because WeChange Implementation to c++
I hope to return to c Implementation
2014-10-05 12:10 ØØÙÙØØ-07:00, Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Dear GCC users,
> As you may have noticed, GCC diagnostics have steadily improved in
> recent releases. In addition to the myriad of bugs fixed per release,
> every release had at least one major improvement in diagnostics.
> Unfortunately, the number of people contributing to this effort is
> very limited and we are more and more busy with other obligations. We
> need new blood and we need help. It has never been easier to
> contribute to GCC than nowadays. There are many ways you can help and
> there are tasks for every level of skill and time commitment.
> Some examples are:
> * There are 610 open bugs with the diagnostic keyword
> Many are easy to implement and there is a description of the strategy
> available (https://gcc.gnu.org/PR49859, https://gcc.gnu.org/PR19808,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/PR38612 https://gcc.gnu.orgPR17896
> https://gcc.gnu.org/PR49973 https://gcc.gnu.org/PR53920 and many more
> like those)
> Many of them require further analysis. That means run GCC under GDB
> and figure out what went wrong. Just doing that would be extremely
> Other bigger projects are not technically difficult, just longer than
> a few hours:
> * Replace libiberty with gnulib. See
> * Add a "spell-checker" (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-04/msg00104.html)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/PR52959 https://gcc.gnu.org/PR52277
> * Investigate the open bugs in the macro unwinder
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/PR52998 https://gcc.gnu.org/PR55252
> https://gcc.gnu.org/PR45333 https://gcc.gnu.org/PR60014)
> * C++ preprocessor ignores #pragma GCC diagnostic
> If you are into Fortran, it would be extremely helpful to contribute
> to fix this one:
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/PR54687 which is not only easy and incremental
> but consists mostly in deleting code and testing.
> Of course, if you are brave and a real hacker, you can always tackle
> some of the heavy stuff that no GCC hacker has figured out how to fix
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501 (and basically
> anything mentioned here:
> * https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60090
> * And any of the points here: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Better_Diagnostics
> We need your help to make GCC better and keep it relevant!
Think not of them, thou hast thy music too