Re: GNATS policy question

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

--On Thursday, December 12, 2002 10:48:03 AM +0100 Volker Reichelt 
<reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:

> On 11 Dec, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
> > > What's the GNATS policy about PRs that issue an ICE in development
> > > versions and a "confused by earlier errors, bailing out" message in
> > > release versions?
> > We should mark those PRs medium-priority.
> >
> > GCC simply doesn't have a coherent design for error-recovery, and until
> > it does the set of places where we crash after error messages will move
> > around from time to time, hopefully shrinking over time.  I have ideas
> > about this, but not enough time to implement them ...
> Shouldn't we suspend those PRs then? We could add "[error-recovery]" to
> the synopsis line. Maybe some of the PRs will be fixed with the new
> parser, so IMHO we should suspend them till the new parser arrives
> anyway before spending too much effort on them.
It's very hard to say where the problems are.  Some might be fixed by the
new parser.  Others need error recovery code in the front ends.  I think
it's OK to keep them open -- they *are* defects.  Just not very important
ones.  Maybe mark them low priority?

--
Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com