This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.3-branch QA assessment
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:26:33 -0800
- Subject: Re: 3.3-branch QA assessment
--On Friday, January 24, 2003 06:05:26 PM -0800 Joe Buck
<jbuck@synopsys.com> wrote:
I've been looking at our high-priority regressions and have come to a
somewhat disturbing conclusion. Now, regressions aren't the whole story,
but based only on the regression data, it seems that 3.3 is in
substantially worse shape than either 3.2.x or 3.4, begging the question
of what the point of the 3.3 branch is. (Please read to the end before
you flame).
You raise an interesting point.
I think it is worth it to spend some time fixing regressions in 3.3 so
that it *is* better than 3.2. The 3.4 numbers would look a lot worse
were it not for the fact that I've been frantically trying to fix new
parser bugs as quickly as possible; that's kept things down there. But,
there are probably going to be a lot more bug reports; I sure don't
expect that I wrote 15,000 lines of completely bug-free code.
So, I think partly you're seeing where effort has been focused.
There's already the new parser and PCH in 3.4, and we might have rtlopt
as well. That's a lot of new technology, and my guess is a lot of new
bugs.
I'd bet we can cleanup 3.3 without *too* much effort, and provide people
with something that is better than 3.2, but that does not have a lot
of the instability from all the major new technology.
Here's a key question: what features are in 3.3 that are not in 3.2?
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com