From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 93104 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2015 17:33:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 93089 invoked by uid 89); 13 Oct 2015 17:33:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp.eu.adacore.com Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO smtp.eu.adacore.com) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:33:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50BA279DB8D; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:32:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.eu.adacore.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A1yc3UG8nPzn; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:32:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from polaris.localnet (bon31-6-88-161-99-133.fbx.proxad.net [88.161.99.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99D6A279DB43; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:32:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Eric Botcazou To: Bernd Schmidt Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] scalar-storage-order merge (2) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:33:00 -0000 Message-ID: <6816711.linpLb1ARX@polaris> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/3.16.7-24-desktop; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <5617A600.7000102@redhat.com> References: <1475877.YmvvkeqT8x@polaris> <5617A600.7000102@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2015-10/txt/msg01285.txt.bz2 > My main question about this series is - how generally useful do you > expect it to be? I know of some different projects that would like > bi-endian capability, but it looks like this series implements something > that is a little too limited to be of use in these cases. AdaCore has customers who have been using it for a few years. With the inline pragma and either the configuration pragma (Ada) or the switch (C/C++), you can use it without much code rewriting. > It looks like it comes with a nontrivial maintenance cost. Nontrivial but manageable IMO and the heavily modified parts (mostly the RTL expander) are "cold" these days. I suspect that less "limited" versions would be far more intrusive and less manageable. Of course I would do the maintenance (I have been doing it for a few years at AdaCore), except for the C++ front-end that I don't know at all; that's why I'm OK to drop the C++ support for now. -- Eric Botcazou