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

 > (B) The new C++ parser is a fair analogy, although clearly the new C++
 > parser was a much smaller piece of work.  It is only about 15,000
 > lines of code.  It only affects C++.  It's not nearly as risky to the
 > overall project as tree-ssa.

My use of the C++ parser analogy was not in reference to it's code
size or scope across the compiler.  Rather it was to your
attentiveness to fixing regressions in it and continuing to improve it

Jeff has offered such a commitment from Redhat towards tree-ssa here:

I also agree with Joe that we should consider bumping to version 4.0
after we merge tree-ssa:
I think it properly communicates the amount of change under the hood
to users.

Whether the merge and major version bump is the next release series or
the one following that is separate IMHO.  But if we can count on
dedicated support for fixing regression bugs and documentation now, I
think we should accept it and merge.  For various reasons, that
commitment may not be available six months or a year later which seems
to be the typical time between release series.

Kaveh R. Ghazi

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