This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?
- From: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>,coyote at coyotegulch dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 10:51:02 -0500
- Subject: Re: Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?
- References: <10312011451.AA25764@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <200312011603.19741.steven@gcc.gnu.org>
It is not a research project. Will you stop claiming that all the time, your
remarks damage the credibility of the project. Do you really believe that so
many work full time on research projects?
I think Richard uses the term research project as we would use it
internally at ACT, to refer to a project that is developing new
technology intended to become part of the deployed product, but not
there yet. So perhaps you are over-reacting here.
Just because Ada hasn't caught up with the rest of GCC doesn't mean that the
work done for other languages is not intended for a production environment.
The GNAT front end will likely move in this direction, but it is
impossible to give time scales for that right now, since it very much
depends on priorities of our customers. I certainly think it is
desirable if the tree-ssa work develops successfuly enough to be part of
the mainline GCC.
By the way, I don't see it as such a big deal if this means that GNAT is
in a situation temporarily of not working with the head. This is
likely to be corrected in a reasonable time anyway. I don't think that
should be a determining factor in the development. If tree-ssa clearly
shows an advantage for C and C++, I would go ahead and deploy it ASAP,
and let other languages follow at their leisure, or faster if someone is
interested enough!