Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?

[Scott Robert Ladd]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> I still think that's the wrong question. The issue is not "when under 
> the current circumstances" will tree-ssa go mainline, but rather when it 
> will go mainline if the National labs supports the product.

To which I would reply: Why should the National Labs support a software 
project without some sense that it is viable? If there is not intention 
for tree-ssa to become mainline, it would be pointless to spend money on 
it, now wouldn't it? Thankfully, others have indeed confirmed that 
tree-ssa is destined for a public debut.

As I said, it is a catch-22; The folks at the national labs need 
confidence in the practical reality of gfortran before being willing to 
fund it, while the GCC developers refuse to commit to gfortran's 
realization without funding.

The twain will never meet if both parties remain in their individual 
corners. Thus it was my goal to nudge the two parties toward each other, 
first by getting a sense of the community support for tree-ssa and gfortran.

> If there is a big infusion of resources into the G95 project, then it 
> will completely change the picture. It is this changed picture that the 
> National Labs should evaluate, not the current situation.

You are asking them to evaluate a theoretical situation (your "changed 
picture") without any data to support it. How do they know that 
providing money will improve gfortran development? If you don't give any 
estimates or answers under current circumstances, how do they know if 
their investment is effective?

-- 
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Software Invention for High-Performance Computing