This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>, Oleg Endo <oleg dot endo at t-online dot de>
- Cc: Georg-Johann Lay <avr at gjlay dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 11:54:12 -0600
- Subject: Re: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=law at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com E303E16BB23
- References: <597F2FB4.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20170731172340.GG13471@gate.crashing.org>
On 07/31/2017 11:23 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 01:12:41AM +0900, Oleg Endo wrote:
>> I could probably write a similar rant. This is the life of a "minority
>> target programmer". Most development efforts are being done with
>> primary targets in mind. And as a result, most changes are being
>> tested only on such targets.
> Also, many changes require retuning of all target backends. This never
> happens for those backends that aren't very actively maintained.
Well, I'd claim it's time to jettison some of those backends :-) I'd
sleep easier at night if we deprecated all the cc0 targets for gcc-8,
then removed them (if they weren't converted) by gcc-9.
Once cc0 is out of the way, then I'd push for doing the same for non-LRA
Yes, it's a bit draconian :-) BUt if someone wants an m68k compiler (to
pick on one I maintain that wouldn't survive), they can always use an
older version of GCC or do the conversion to bring it up to modern
standards. Realistically I'll never do it for the m68k, it's just not
important enough relatively to the other stuff on my plate.