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]

Re: Time for GCC 5.0? (TIC)

From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
Cc: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>, Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at redhat dot com>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:59:44 -0800
Subject: Re: Time for GCC 5.0? (TIC)
References: <CABu31nPnuk57bnuVswvtUA667iHZqs7i1s_fFo0yZfRMUX+HDA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKOQZ8xk_1BUq8j5uK7eVpWnprx_ebis8uN1sOU6jr247jF7LA@mail.gmail.com>

On 2012-11-05 16:17 , Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:34:15 +0000, Dave Korn wrote:
   Say, why don't we reserve GCC 5.0 for the first version that gets rid of
reload?  Then let's see if we can get there while the X in 4.X is still in
single digits!
(see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg01103.html)

I suppose LRA counts, even if it doesn't get rid of reload completely just yet.

Bump the number! :-)
Also the fact that GCC is now written in C++ seems to me to be
deserving of a bump to 5.0.

I agree. This might be a good time to bump the major version number. In addition to the C++ switch, I think we have a ton of new features. Alerting users that this release may be a double-edged sword seems wise.

Diego.

References:
- Time for GCC 5.0? (TIC)
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Time for GCC 5.0? (TIC)
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

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