"Experimental" features in releases

[Richard Guenther]

On 17 Apr 2006 17:44:50 -0600, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "Mark" == Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
> Mark> In any case, the broader question is: to what extent should we have
> Mark> experimental options in releases, and how should we warn users of their
> Mark> experimental nature?
>
> Why not put this into the option name?  Something like '-Xoption' or
> '-fexperimental-option?  Then people will know that it is
> experimental.  Also, such options could be documented in a separate
> section to avoid people tripping over them by mistake.

Now that raises the question which option is actually experimental.  I
don't think
new options get into gcc while thought of being experimental (as in, randomly
produces wrong-code) - the only one which I remember is -ftree-vectorize which
was said to be so in 4.0.

Richard.