This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: rearranging REG_ALLOC_ORDER in gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h


On Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 12:44 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
Whether the kernel can be FP reg free, in which case the kernel doesn't have to save/restore FP regs for its own use. In both cases, you have to get this exactly right or you can't do it at all.

Hum... Isn't that like saying, I'm sorry, we don't accept ports with any bugs in there. Surely they all do, so surely we should remove them all, or optimization passes with bugs.


If this were mandated for complex features, the compiler would have no complex features. EH would not exist, for sure.

gcc has a legacy of half ideas in it. g++ is such a half idea. C99 support is such a half idea. Templates certainly are. Anyway, my point is that gcc is stronger for having these things, despite the fact that they all are all there yet, and never may be.

Ideas that cannot be made to work, or are at odds with the design of the compiler, or bad ideas... should be rejected, but on those grounds...


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