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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline

Similarly, I believe that code reviews are important and valuable. While
we certainly can't force folks to review the code, if folks are willing
to review, then the tree-ssa developers ought to embrace that feedback
and "do the right thing" based on that feedback. A code review is certainly
made more valuable if the reviewer has the design background.

I have no problem with getting reviews of the code, or updating the code based on that feedback. I'd like to make that abundantly clear.
I have a significant problem with some of the code not getting reviewed for large periods of time, which is the much more likely scenario (as unfortunate as that may be)
If you or Richard or Jason aren't the ones doing the reviews (since you guys wrote some of the code, or originally approved some of the passes on the tree-ssa branch, so presumably, you have no significant problem with it), then who exactly is?

I'd rather see multiple people try to review tree-ssa all at once, which admittedly, is a large job, but it's just as large as reviewing it separately!.
There is nothing to stop different reviewers from reviewing or commenting on different parts if it is submitted as a whole. They can easily make comments that may be directed at specific parts that people can clean up.
If it isn't done this way, then the likely outcome is some pieces of tree-ssa in the mainline, some pieces waiting for review, some pieces waiting for someone to cleanup, etc. This would mean all performance numbers posted are invalid, and depending what *actually* gets in before 3.5, we may or may not have severe regressions.

I just don't see how a piecemeal review and submission of this branch is going to help anything, and I believe it is much more likely to hurt tree-ssa and gcc than it is to help.

Now, if someone is going to guarantee that all of the pieces tree-ssa will be reviewed in a timely manner, or at least will be reviewed and processed before 3.5 stage1 is over, then that would go a long way towards alleviating my concerns.


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