This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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] |
Inter-module analysis is very simple. Trying to change decl handlingImplementing inter-module analysis without thinking about the current known defects in the way the front end manages its symbol table is also hard. :-)
in the compiler without thinking about the consequences of
inter-module analysis: that's hard.
What I did to implement IMA is to make the compiler handle multipleYes, and that's a good thing.
translation units in the same process.
Obviously, that would be the goal.We'll likely break some aspects of inter-module optimization when we
fix some of the single translation-unit issues. That is what we get
for collectively not agreeing on a single development plan.
I worry when I see statements like this. I presume that by "break", you mean that "while working on these patches, some things will break, but of course those will be fixed before any patch is actually checked in, or as soon as possible afterwards if we didn't notice them before checkin", correct?
-- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC (916) 791-8304 mark@codesourcery.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |