This is the mail archive of the 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: Designs for better debug info in GCC

On Dec 17, 2007, Diego Novillo <> wrote:

> On 12/17/07 12:51, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I guess I'm to blame, for having naÃÂvely put the code out without as
>> much as a design and goals document

> Yes, you are.

Wow, thanks.  At least we agree on something! ;-)

> You need to provide such a document now.

Can't I instead provide it when it's ready?

You know, it wasn't me who asked to have the thing developed in the
open.  I didn't push it out just so that people who didn't want to
understand it could beat on it before it was ready to defend itself.
I put it out because there was an offer for contribution.

> I can't see how you'll be able to incorporate your implementation
> without a convincing design.

Agreed, I don't see how this would be doable for any but the most
trivial patches.

> The barrier is probably going to be higher.
> You raised too much controversy, so I have my doubts about your
> simplicity claims.

Oh, nice!  *I* raised too much controversy.  So people first ask me to
put the code out such that they can peek at it and help, then most
refrain from peeking at it because it's not ready and some who do
raise some concerns that are not reflected by the code, and then
everyone doubts I've taken those concerns into account and demand a
design document that will no more than just repeat the information
that's already out there but that people fail to take into account.

And then, this is a technical discussion, so historical controversy
shouldn't play any role in it, if people were rational about it.

Now, can you please explain to me how the efforts of repeating myself
one more time, rather than completing the implementation, are going to
make it any more likely that people who have already made up their
minds based on groundless fears will be convinced?

If you really think it would be worth it, can you point out at what
you feel to be missing in the consolidated documentation I posted
upthread, in response to your request?  I'd be happy to fill in the
blanks, if you're willing to listen.  But I wouldn't be happy to waste
more time.

(This is not to say that the document won't ever be produced; it's to
say that I'm to work on it right now.  I have other deliverables ahead
of it.)

Alexandre Oliva
FSF Latin America Board Member
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{,}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{,}

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