This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patches for PR29464, PR29821 & PR29916 - ping*3
- From: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>
- Cc: "fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org List" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:22:15 +0100
- Subject: Re: Patches for PR29464, PR29821 & PR29916 - ping*3
- References: <456DE8C6.email@example.com>
These patches are beginning to suffer from bit-rot. I have already
pinged them once. I propose to commit them to trunk on Saturday
morning, unless somebody intervenes with reviews, and to follow
with a commit to 4.2 a week later.
I'm sorry that I'm in no position to do any gfortran-related work
these days, and really can't review your patches. I did a bit of
reading anyway, and I think your patches for PR29821 & PR29916 are
OK. For PR29821, I don't have a definite opinion on what whether we
should return the result, but I think doing it the way it's done in
your patch is OK (especially with the comment).
For PR29464, I understand your eagerness to have it commited and also
agree that reviewing power is not very high these days (I'm partially
guilty for that) but I frankly don't think a patch 4 days old is
really something unacceptable :) Since we've had a few regressions
on 4.2/4.3 recently (see Joost' recent meta-PR; his code used to
build perfectly fine, I use it for my day work!), maybe we should
play a little safer.