This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
- To: aoliva at redhat dot com, dewar at gnat dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com
- Subject: Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
- From: dewar at gnat dot com
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
<<I see what you mean, but this is not what I mean by `regression'.
A failure that did not exist in a previous release is different
from a failure that did. A failure that existed in a previous
release is one that people are already dealing with; a new failure
adds to their burden.
>>
I agree, the new patch was essentially an incorrect or incomplete fix
for the bug it attempted to fix, since a proper fix should not introduce
regressions. This means that the proper fix has to be found. Whether
finding this fix requires that the original incorrect/incomplete fix
be reverted is a judgment call. This call has to be made by someone
with a suitably global view of requirements and importance of particular
tests on particular targets.