From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12519 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2010 10:57:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 12358 invoked by uid 48); 6 Apr 2010 10:56:27 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100406105627.12356.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/40436] [4.5 regression] 0.5% code size regression caused by r147852 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00465.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #30 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-06 10:56 ------- I think it is a really, really bad signal if a bug like this, where the revision that introduced the issue was identified >9 months ago, remains unfixed for GCC 4.5. I, for one, wouldn't care hunting down revisions that introduce regressions in stage1 anymore, if component maintainers and release managers just postpone fixing the issue until it is too late to fix for a release. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40436