Re: GCC 3.5 Plan, Take 2

[Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>]

On Aug 15, 2004, at 6:47 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:

> I expect it to be hard to get GCC 3.5's code-generation to be
> noticably better than GCC 3.4.x's across the board within a few
> months.  I expect that it will not be until six months to a year hence
> that we'll see noticably better code generation on most test cases.
> Since I don't think that most people want to wait that long for GCC
> 3.5, I think we need to accept that we're shooting for code generation
> that is, in general, not worse, and may be better on some particularly
> high-profile cases.  In the worst case, we may even have to accept
> worse code on some real cases.  If we can vectorize some loops, and
> SRA provides big wins on some C++ test cases, and we're in general
> pretty close to GCC 3.4, I think the release will be well-received,
> given all the other improvements.

I'm concerned specifically about lno-branch.  My understanding is
that we agreed not to do a wholesale merge from lno-branch into
mainline and that instead we would more things in on a case by case
basis.  That's fine, but we need to make sure we're realistically
on track for all those patches to get into mainline before we move
into stage 3.  Right now it looks like the lno-branch patch
approvals are going pretty slowly.

			--Matt