Why not gnat Ada in gcc?
Jeffrey A Law
law@cygnus.com
Fri Oct 13 14:50:00 GMT 2000
In message < 10010121139.AA01770@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu >you write:
> > But I don't think we're here yet or anytime in less than a year, so
> I
> > don't think it is useful to argue on the source merging process rig
> ht
> > now.
>
> I would claim the opposite. We need this to happen sooner, not later.
> The longer we wait, the more difficult our work becomes and the longer
> we have to deal with the problem of developers making changes, but
> being unable to test that they haven't broken Ada.
>
> Sorry, I don't follow. You comment certainly argues in favor of putting in
> the tree soon, which everybody already agrees on, but how does it argue in
> favor of deciding on a merge policy soon, which is what Laurent was talking
> about?
>From my experience it's a lot easier to deal with the merge policy at the same
time you move the bits into the tree since it has major impacts on the
development policy.
jeff
More information about the Gcc
mailing list