This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [PATCH PING] unreviewed tree-slimming patches
- From: Nathan Froyd <froydnj at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 14:09:27 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH PING] unreviewed tree-slimming patches
- References: <4DDD0B95.40308@codesourcery.com> <m3y61uwt70.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On 05/25/2011 02:06 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Nathan" == Nathan Froyd <froydnj@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
> Nathan> (C, Java, middle-end)
> Nathan> [PATCH 18/18] make TS_BLOCK a substructure of TS_BASE
> Nathan> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00564.html
>
> The Java parts are ok.
>
> I think these sorts of changes should be obvious once approved from a
> middle-end perspective, at least assuming that there are no regressions.
>
> I mentioned this idea before but I didn't see any discussion of it. I
> am happy to continue looking at patches like this if that is what the
> more active maintainers would prefer.
I think Jason mentioned considering them approved after waiting a week. If we
want to enshrine that as policy, I think that'd be reasonable. All in favor...?
-Nathan