public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pcarlini at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug objc++/31134] [4.3 Regression] Objective-C++ has ran into the tree number limit Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 01:04:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20070312010421.1661.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-31134-276@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> ------- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-12 01:04 ------- > It's not fair to trade one feature for another (variadic templates > for obj-c++). I agree. > There's been no discussion on the impact of fixing the tree code limit. > I note that a 15% compile time memory usage regression, > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00652.html>, > would be considered a release blocker. By the way, that issue has been already analyzed and seems solvable rather easily, Doug is working on it with Richard' help. > The patch was obviously not fully tested, or the problem was overlooked. > As a backend maintainer, I've seen build and check times grow substantially > with every new release. So, I'm highly suspicious of the process used > to introduce major new features. The tree code limit should have been > fixed first. Yes, you have a point. But now, since because of our "lazyness" we never managed to attack the tree code limit, let's take this "crisis" as an occasion to do that, or at least let's try to our best, instead of reverting completely Doug' work, which is incredibly important for our implementation of C++0x features and, I would say, gives GCC a great competitive advantage. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31134
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-12 1:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2007-03-11 14:40 [Bug objc++/31134] New: objc-act.c:570: error: comparison is always false danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-11 14:42 ` [Bug objc++/31134] " danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-11 15:03 ` schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-11 22:53 ` [Bug objc++/31134] [4.3 Regression] Objective-C++ has ran into the tree number limit dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-11 23:48 ` pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-12 0:56 ` dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-12 1:04 ` pcarlini at suse dot de [this message] 2007-03-12 5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-12 9:08 ` pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-28 18:46 ` dgregor at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20070312010421.1661.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).