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: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>, pinskia at gmail dot com
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 11:03:02 -0600
Subject: Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <2354857 dot 0uXrE6NL1R at polaris> <CAFiYyc0aVBYeT2Utr9=NxKVLGMEPWMBR7Qb+=ataQG93fgw55w at mail dot gmail dot com> <942B0474-BB29-4417-BD62-65A22DF0BA24 at gmail dot com> <2378875 dot nh2BShqZTT at polaris>

On 06/09/2015 10:20 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:

Because some folks don't want to audit their code to where to add byteswaps.
I am serious people have legacy big-endian code they want to run little
endian. There is a reason this is around in the first place. Developers are
lazy.


That's a little rough, but essentially correct in our experience.

Agreed on both points. These legacy codebases can be large and fullauditing may not really be that feasible.


jeff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
  - From: Richard Biener

References:
- Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
  - From: Richard Biener
- Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
  - From: pinskia
- Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline
  - From: Eric Botcazou

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