This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
second ping [PATCH] PR debug/5271
- From: Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>
- To: jason at redhat dot com, geoffk at geoffk dot org
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 15:52:11 +0200
- Subject: second ping [PATCH] PR debug/5271
- References: <20031020005613.GB24836@alinoe.com>
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 02:56:13AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Here is another week-old patch, that I'd like to have reviewed:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-10/msg00968.html
>
>
> There are two related issues that would like to bring under
> your attention:
>
> 1) My legal papers are still not finished; rest assured
> that I will not commit the patch until the assignment
> papers are finished and just review the patch as if
> that problem has been taken care of. (I expect this to
> be finished within two weeks now).
>
> 2) This patch is quite 'big' due to the replacement of
> build(CALL_EXPR,...) with build_call_expr(...) at
> a lot of places. If that gives issues with a merge
> with tree-ssa then I propose to not apply this
> patch till after the creation of the 3.4 branch;
> this patch is namely only needed for 3.4 and not
> for 3.5, as is explained in the url above.
>
> Thus:
>
> current mainline
> |
> |
> tree-ssa |
> | |
> | |-----.
> | | |
> \ / Apply patch
> \ / |
> merge V
> | 3.4 branch
> |
> V
> new mainline
>
> because it seems to make no sense to first apply
> this to mainline, create the 3.4 branch, do
> the merge with tree-ssa and then remove the
> patch again from the new mainline.
> Just a proposal ofcourse :), please let me know
> what is the prefered procedure.
>
> --
> Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
I just posted the assignment papers.
Jason / Geoff, can one of you please give me some feedback
on this patch? Or tell me who should be reviewing it?
--
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>