GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available")

[John Vickers]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> I haven't been testing gcc2 any more, because it doesn't include a
> testsuite, which makes testing it much harder than egcs.  Furthermore,
> I don't believe gcc2 is going to evolve any more.  I see no reason to
> work on it, since egcs is doing that well.

It's funny how more-or-less the same people seem to get a whole lot more
done since egcs started.

> > Perhaps it's time to drop the "experimental", which was only
> > ever really a polite fiction.
> 
> How about replacing `experimental' with `extended'?

I think the web pages say something about the 'e' not standing for
anything
in particular at all, or perhaps standing for whatever happens to be
expedient at the time.

Why bother with merging anyway ?  

What does specifically does gcc have these days, apart from the brand
name ?

These are not just rhetorical questions, I would be interested to know
what the answers are.

John.