Re: [PATCH] MIPS32 DSP intrinsics

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Richard Sandiford wrote:

> > In either case, it's great to encourage these things, but we know that 
> > users will want the compiler support, even if these things aren't 
> > necessarily available.
>
>
> ...my whole point is that, at the moment, most users _can't_ reasonably
> use this stuff.  There's nothing to tell them what the instructions do,
> and no publicly-available hardware for them to try it on.  That's my
> understanding anyway.

Presumably, there will be such hardware soonish, and then users and 
distributors who have GCC 4.1 will be all set.  If we wait to include 
the bits until after there's more public information, then we won't have 
support until some later point, and users who go out and buy the 
hardware when it's released will lose.  I think it's reasonable for a 
company to want to have released versions of GCC support their hardware 
on the day that the hardware is first released.  And I think that's a 
great thing for GCC; other compilers may not be as far along!

Of course, there may be lots of other reasons not to accept the code!  I 
just don't think lack of simulators and/or docs should be one.  I think 
it's in our long-term interest to encourage hardware vendors to invest 
in GCC and if we require simulators/docs/hardware up front that will 
discourage them, or encourage them to develop on private branches. 
Either way, our FSF userbase loses.

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304