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


  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: link
Be 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).