[Re: new plugin events]

[Terrence Miller]

IDE projects are an example of development that could make good use of a 
plugin that might never be integrated in the
compiler, indeed shouldn't ever be integrated in the compiler.

                                     Terrence Miller

Richard Guenther wrote:
> Basile STARYNKEVITCH  wrote:
>>
>> Terrence Miller wrote:
>>     
>>> I think this debate is missing one important issue. In order to generate a
>>> patch to GCC
>>> you have to know a lot more about the compiler internals than is required
>>> to create
>>> a plugin.  I am doing some casual experimentation with compiler based
>>> source browsing
>>> and would love to have the DECL event(described below) added to the plugin
>>> API.
>>> I would prefer to not have to figure where that plugin should be called.
>>>
>>>       
>> It is perhaps true for the DECL event you are talking about (which I did not
>> understood fully), but I won't say that coding a plugin is *in general*
>> easier than proposing a patch to core GCC.
>>
>> My perception is that most *middle* end plugins are working on Gimple and
>> other middle-end representations. Usually, they do that by adding a pass in
>> the pass machinery. And knowing what pass to add (or replace) is as
>> difficult when coding a plugin than when coding a patch to GCC core.
>>
>> Conversely, I would suspect than many previous patches (which have now bee
>> incorporated in GCC core) could have if a plugin machinery have been
>> available at their time (which is false since plugin facilities is just
>> coming in 4.5 which has not yet been released), first been developped as
>> plugins -at least to experiment their viability & interest- and later one
>> proposed as a patch.
>>
>> This is why I believe that plugins will probably -at least for middle-end
>> processing- have also the role of GCC branches today, with a very important
>> difference. Almost nobody compiles branches today (in the general GCC user
>> community - I am not talking of the smaller GCC developper community), and
>> it could be the case that some plugins will be used.
>>
>> For example, as far as I know, no common Linux distribution provides a
>> package for any kind of GCC branch. I believe (perhaps I am too optimistic)
>> that some Linux distributions will package some few GCC plugins.
>>     
>
> You keep re-iterating this (IMHO bogus) argument.  I don't see how a plugin
> in development is any different here - nobody will build or distribute it.
> OTOH after a branch is mature it will be merged into the GCC core, so it
> will be immediately available in distributed GCCs.
>
> Richard.
>
>