Re: [RFC] Delete unused functions?

[Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at polimi dot it>]

> Secondly, and obviously I can't repeat this enough, all patch
> contributions should report the target triples that they were
> bootstrapped and regression tested on, and include the results of
> such testing.

This is only an RFC for a patch I prepared in ten minutes, it's as far 
as possible from requesting approval.  First of all, removing them may 
in turn make other functions unreachableThe patch as is bootstrapped.

Second, my script provides a quick start and all the functions suggested 
by my script should be hand-checked before removing them: I did this 
work on a tree without Ada to save checkout time, of course I would do 
the tests on a full tree, and on tree-ssa-pre-merge as well, before 
suggesting a serious patch.  All I wanted was comments, and Andrew, Jan 
and you provided them indeed.

Being harsh is your maintainer's duty but, believe it or not (apart 
from, I admit, omitting the fact that I've bootstrapped/regtested the 
patch i686-pc-linux-gnu, which I *always* do), I do follow the rules in 
contribute.html.  I'm sorry for the times I broke other platforms than 
this one, but I feel I've always fixed things properly.  Unluckily I 
have no SPARC, IA64, Alpha or even x86-64 machines to test my changes 
on; I hope that I am still helping GCC in some way.

I did make a major mistake with the LTGT_EXPR patch; I have a better fix 
than what is currently on HEAD, and I'm trying to see why my machine 
does not run the Java tests, before submitting it.

Paolo