This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GNATS survey
Joseph S. Myers <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> middle-end PRs probably also fit in much the same grouping -
Yes they do.
> And a fair number
> of "c" PRs should be moved to "optimization" or "middle-end" if they don't
> look anything to do with the C front end itself (just problems the user
> found compiling C code).
Yes, we already did this many times and we will continue doing it.
> Where confirmed includes not just that the compiler behaves as the user
> claims, but that this is indeed incorrect: if the bug report is that code
> is wrongly accepted/rejected, it is indeed wrong for the compiler to
> accept/reject that code, as you note:
Yes. In the official rules, there should be written that, for a PR to be
"analyzed", it's required to specify the class (reject-legal,
accept-illegal, etc) of the PR correctly, and that we must be absolutely
certain of it. For C++, I personally use comp.std.c++ when in doubt, and
help from the language lawyers here is welcome. Actually, there are also a
few PRs about GCC language extensions that would require a GCC lawyer - I
think for those we will just ask for help on the mailing list.
Giovanni Bajo