From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30366 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2013 10:52:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 30176 invoked by uid 48); 6 Mar 2013 10:51:28 -0000 From: "steven at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/47344] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression][meta-bug] GCC gets slower and uses more memory Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 10:52:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Keywords: compile-time-hog, memory-hog, meta-bug X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: steven at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.4 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 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: 2013-03/txt/msg00470.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47344 --- Comment #7 from Steven Bosscher 2013-03-06 10:51:27 UTC --- This bug looks like the wrong idea to me. Old is apparently anything older than the maintained release branches, but many users "in the field" still use older compilers that come with their respective distributions. For instance a regresion that is present since GCC 4.6 but not in GCC 4.5 gets reduced in importance and visibility by not marking it as regression and instead only adding it to this grab-a-bag PR. Example of such a case is bug 53958. This is a change of old existing policy that any regression should be marked as such. This policy change should have been discussed (and IMHO rejected) on the GCC mailing list. Also, this meta-bug depends on not-so-old regressions, so it's already more like a collection of compile/memory hog issues than a collection point for apparently "unimportant" regressions.