This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Ada policy
* Laurent GUERBY:
> On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 21:28, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> I understand that Ada is already in much better shape than we expected
>> it to be before the tree-ssa merge (and that's certainly good news!),
>> but I really doubt we should make a release criterion the quality of a
>> component that has received very little testing by the general GCC
>> community.
>
> I'm just talking about bootstrap, passing ACATS and no known regression
> on two targets, not "quality" in general (whatever that means).
I was talking about bootstrap and ACATS, too, but on a more general
scale. Today's x86 systems are far from being homogeneous.
> Is that what you want for Ada now?
You wrote that the GCC 3.4 release was pretty good from an Ada point
of view, and we didn't have any formalized Ada criteria for it.
As far as I can see, we haven't had a bootstrapping Ada compiler for
months. (This is by no means a criticism, I note that we are still
way ahead of the original schedule, Ada-wise. Certainly I didn't
expect Ada to be included in 3.5 at all, based on the discussion
before the tree-ssa merge.) I think, however, that it is unreasonable
to expect that large fraction of GCC developers will be able to
_efficiently_ deal with Ada regressions before the 3.5 release, simply
because they lack an Ada toolchain that is in a well-defined state and
can be used to build a compiler and a working run-time environment.