This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/16163] [3.5 Regression] O(N^2) in expand
- From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 26 Jun 2004 08:46:13 -0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/16163] [3.5 Regression] O(N^2) in expand
- References: <20040623181806.16163.belyshev@lubercy.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-06-26 08:46 -------
Just assinging to Kenner, I should note that I just changed a linear search in look of field decls for
3.3.3 into a binary one. So please fix this or revert your patch as this example is just the begining of
the compile time issues with this patch.
Again Mark asked you to remove this patch until you fixed these issues with your patch, please do so as
this is causing other people to think it is okay to break testcases also. There are at least 22 regressions
right now on the mainline on powerpc-apple-darwin with 5 being new since June 21. With most likely
3 regressions caused by your patch.
The reason why gcc-patches@ exist is so people can test out your patch and comment on it before you
commit it, most developers (and global maintainers when they do not know the code they are touching)
do this if they know it will cause other people problem first.
I should not some languages (Java) do not support VLA in structs why punish them at all, in fact your
patch causes a regression in Java which you said you do not understand what is going wrong.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kenner at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-06-26 08:46:12
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16163