This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Fortran] Patch ping


On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 07:34:30PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>On 18 April 2012 at 18:57, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:47:48AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>>>Approved but not yet committed:
>>>Bernhard:
>>>- [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: implicitly cleanup-modules, part 2
>>>  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-04/msg00065.html
>>Before actually pushing this, I ment to ask if we *want* to make
>>sure that we do not add superfluous cleanup-module calls in the
>>future (which would slow down testing needlessly)?
>>
>>If so we would either have to manually reject occurances of those during
>>patch-review or install a warning or the like if there is an explicit
>>cleanup-modules call yielding the same set as the now automatically
>>determined set.
>
>I would go for the manual method: As cleanup-modules is something
>which developers tend to forget, I do not think that many patches
>will include them. On then simply tries to reduce those by patch
>review. - If patch developers do not see it in other files, the
>chance is high that they do not even know (or remember) about that
>feature in a few months.
>
>And after some time (1/2 year, 1 year?), one can check whether a
>spurious clean-up modules has slipped in - or whether some
>cleanup-module is missing. I expect that there will be none or very,
>very few cases.

I have committed this as r187521.

thanks,


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]