Backport Policy Question
Paul Thomas
paulthomas2@wanadoo.fr
Sat Oct 21 11:32:00 GMT 2006
François-Xavier and Jerry,
>
>
> But the second point means that we need to decide now what features we
> want to integrate into 4.3, and start working on those rather quickly,
> because stages 1 & 2 don't last forever.
>
I propose that we hold a #gcc meeting to "decide" these matters. It
would be very helpful to have all the developers present and a menu of
possible new features to discuss.
Aside from what appears on the Wiki, I seem to recall some weeks or
months back that there was somebody who was going to implement C
indexing for gfortran. If that is an active project, we want to see it
asap. Also, we should consider sorting out the stride of pointers, so
that we can pointer assign or pass to procedures components of derived
type arrays. I am painfully aware of the kludge that I introduced into
trans-expr.c for the latter and that there is a PR out because it
doesn't behave entirely as it should.
Speaking entirely for myself, I would rather like to see 4.3 as a
consolidation phase, where we all but eliminate rejects-valid,
wrong-code and ICE-on_valid's, where we address at least some the
diagnostic failures in the Polyhedron diagnostic test (FX has already
been busy there) and that we have another performance bee (I know that
there is backend work going on, which is relevant here but I
suspect/know that we have some unresolved business too - MOD for
example). On the latter, it would already be a big step forward to
identify where the bottlenecks are in the five poor performers in the
Polyhedron suite, when run on 64 bit machines.
'nuff said!
Paul
More information about the Fortran
mailing list