[Bug c/32387] New: back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[Bug c/32387] New: back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[malitzke at metronets dot com]

Taking the exceptional backport of TPA to gcc-4.2.x I request studying the
possibility of doing the same for POINTER_PLUS.


-- 
           Summary: back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional
                    basis
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.2.1
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: malitzke at metronets dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug c/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-18 02:27 -------
Unlike the TPA backport, pointer plus does not fix any regression (except from
3.4.0).  Also it is a huge patch which is still going through some bug fixes
(C++ one and IV-OPTS one, and a SCEV one).


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug c/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[malitzke at metronets dot com]

------- Comment #2 from malitzke at metronets dot com  2007-06-18 02:47 -------
I am not making this request lightheartedly.

POINTER_PLUS was developed on a branch and went in very cleanly.

I always stressed to my students that that "A good theory is a most practical
thing" I just happen to to a member of Sigma Xi.

from discussions surrounding the release of gcc-4.2.0 there appear to be a
number of unresolved issues concerning gcc-4.2 and the release manager had
serious misgivings. POINTER_PLUS just might help.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug c/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-18 02:50 -------
No pointer plus will make it worse.  It changes so many non tested parts of GCC
it is not funny.  I added like 5 testcases to the testsuite because we were not
testing those parts.  The reason why 4.2 was bad is not because of features but
because people did not work on regressions that much.  I think 4.3 has/is
changed a lot of people and how they work because most of the work they were
working on has gone in.  So people now are working on regressions, this is
unlike 4.2 where people working hard on other projects during stage3.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug c/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[malitzke at metronets dot com]

------- Comment #4 from malitzke at metronets dot com  2007-06-18 02:53 -------
I realize that good things do not come easy.

I also believe there is over-reliance on regression among the gcc-insiders.

Enhancement has a priority below trivial and I am jut requesting a study of an
enhancement.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug c/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[malitzke at metronets dot com]

------- Comment #5 from malitzke at metronets dot com  2007-06-18 03:15 -------
Hey, more good news about POINTER_PLUS. It might help smoke out bugs in other
parts of GCC. I hope these can be labeled as so called regressions so that
people will be forced to work on them.

Concerning non-regression test cases and as a by-product of my porting work I
am developing a list of packages having good and excellent "make check"
diagnostics. I do not consider kernels good test beds for a compiler because
the are vey specialized and narrow programming constructs that take great pains
to circumvent many compiler areas and certainly dynamic libraries. I was very
surprised that I turned up 3 cases that got real attention from the linux
folks. (One had nothing to do with the compiler; just SCSI controller stuff)


-- 

malitzke at metronets dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387

[Bug tree-optimization/32387] back port POINTER_PLUS to gcc-4.2.1 on an exceptional basis

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-06-18 03:19 -------
First you are crazy even in suggesting a back port.  4.2.x is feature frozen. 
If you don't like that, use 4.3.0 (trunk) instead.

Yes it might show up other bugs in other places but that is the reason why they
are called latent bugs.  Please stop reopening this.  Pointer plus is too many
changes to go on a release branch.  I think you also need to learn a release
cycle is.  Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html .


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
          Component|c                           |tree-optimization
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32387