This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Patches to C++ front end have caused numerous regressions
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "S. Bosscher" <S dot Bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>
- Cc: "'jh at suse dot cz '" <jh at suse dot cz>, "'edelsohn at gnu dot org '" <edelsohn at gnu dot org>, "'rth at redhat dot com '" <rth at redhat dot com>, "'gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org '" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 12 Sep 2003 15:30:52 -0700
- Subject: RE: Patches to C++ front end have caused numerous regressions
- References: <4195D82C2DB1D211B9910008C7C9B06F01F3739D@lr0nt3.lr.tudelft.nl>
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 15:09, S. Bosscher wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Mark, you say "numerous" and make it sound real bad, but in your example you
> show all _seven_ regressions, compared to test suite runs from two days ago.
I consider 7 to be numerous, but I agree that one could debate whether
to say "several" or "lots" or "a few". Let's just say 7. :-)
> OK, so they are regressions and that's not good. But can you please _not_
> just revert all that work, especially since you know that the people who
> caused these _will_ be very willing to fix them ASAP?
It's easy to unrevert work. And, the reason for the 48 hour rule is to
give them time to fix it ASAP. :-)
> I would like to remind you that even you can't just revert this under the
> 48hrs rule, since: "_two_ people with write privileges to the affected area
> of the compiler determine that the best course of action is to revert the
> patch;"
That's an excellent point.
I'll have to see if I can find someone who agrees with me.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com