This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc? (Robert Dewar) writes:

> <<You're working on free software for the fsf, therefore IMO you ought
> to be doing your development in the open if at all possible.  And
> clearly (as Cygnus nee Red Hat and Codesourcery demonstrate) it is
> not only possible, but not particularly difficult.
> >>
> Actually from past experiences recently, e.g. with the ia64 port, I have
> been struck by how closed the development was. Same thing for gdb5, this
> was kept under wraps for a long time. A large company (I won't name names)
> that we worked with was essentially operating as though it were under
> non-disclosure. Both the ia64 port and gdb5 were sudden massive updates,
> and it is hard to see how else it could have been done.

gdb5 was not a sudden massive update.
What are you talking about?
Can you point the changelog entry where all of gdb5 suddenly appeared
It looks like a pretty logical progression looking through the
changelogs, starting with april 1999->may 22, 2000.


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