gcc : c++11 : full support : eta?

[Richard Biener]

Uday Khedker <uday@cse.iitb.ac.in> wrote:

>
>
>
>On Tuesday 22 January 2013 10:27 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:
>>> Perhaps it'd be worthwhile to consider making the compiler easier to
>>> understand, maybe by devoting a lot of effort into the internals
>>> documentation.  There's a lot of knowledge wrapped up in people that
>>> could disappear with one bus factor.
>>
>> That is definitely a worthwhile goal, and one that's had mixed
>success
>> in the past, but:
>>
>> - compilers are extremely complex programs and there's a limit to how
>>    much even the best-written internals documentation can explain
>> - even fewer people are interested and competant to write such
>documentation
>>    as there are to do the necessary development work
>>
>
>
>This is because no matter what one has done, unless one has contributed
>
>code, one is not considered a contributor to GCC.
>
>I had said in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-11/msg00270.html
>
>>
>> So while we continue to improve the technology, we have to also give
>due importance to making it easier for newer people to become
>contributors to the technology.
>>
>> GCC is not just about a code that works. It is also about building
>succinct explanations of what that code is and why it has been designed
>the way it is.
>
>The way code maintainers are appointed, I think we need to identify and
>
>appoint people who would be willing to take the responsibility so that 
>the developers could rally around such activities to make them more 
>meaningful. We need to build a group whose primary responsibility is
>not 
>development but who understand the nuances of the development and can 
>engage with academia and attract people who can contribute to GCC.
>And such a group cannot be identified using the criteria of code
>submitted.
>
>For every piece of code, there are dozens of people who take keen 
>interest in it, express opinion on it, review it critically and 
>contribute to improving it because eventually it could go in the
>compiler.
>
>Unless there is an express statement from the steering committee that 
>tutorials and training material should be accorded a similar status, 
>they would remain neglected and personal projects with limited reach.
>Of course even in the presence of an official mandate, there is no 
>guarantee that things will change but we would not know until we have 
>tried :-)

There is no need to involve the steering committee in anything. If you believe that building such a group (of volunteers) is good for gcc consider yourself the volunteer to build it!

Richard.
>
>Uday.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Dr. Uday Khedker
>Professor
>Department of Computer Science & Engg.
>IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400 076, India.
>Email   : 	uday@cse.iitb.ac.in
>Homepage: 	http://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/~uday
>Phone   : 	
>Office - 	91 (22) 2572 2545 x 7717, 91 (22) 2576 7717 (Direct)
>Res.   - 	91 (22) 2572 2545 x 8717, 91 (22) 2576 8717 (Direct)