This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Document experimental nature of -fnew-ra?
- From: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- To: Dara Hazeghi <dhazeghi at yahoo dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,bugzilla-masters at dberlin dot org
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 22:48:09 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document experimental nature of -fnew-ra?
- References: <email@example.com>
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Dara Hazeghi wrote:
> Also, because bugs reported against -fnew-ra on 3.4-branch are not
> necessarily still present against new-regalloc branch, I've suspended
> them until such a time as they are verified on the new-regalloc branch,
What exactly does the state "suspended" mean for bugs in bugzilla? Can I
still comment on them and mark them as fixed?
> or new-regalloc is merged back to mainline.
> Does the attached patch look reasonable for mainline/3.4? Thanks,
> -for testing, so we are interested to hear about miscompilations with
> +only for testing. Users should not specify this option, since it is not
Two spaces between sentences.
> +yet ready for production use.
Otherwise I have no objection to the patch. The wording should have been
similar to this from the beginning.