From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11510 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2003 02:28:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11454 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2003 02:28:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Oct 2003 02:28:31 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA19389; Thu, 23 Oct 03 22:29:03 EDT Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 12:26:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10310240229.AA19389@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: jbuck@synopsys.com Subject: Re: No basic improvements branch for 3.5 - work on tree-ssa Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg01178.txt.bz2 I would expect that the GCC problems I refer to hurt performance of all languages that use struct/record types. Other languages will benefit from tree-ssa even more, and front ends will be easier to write. Nobody is trying to argue that it isn't worthwhile to persue, just that the statement that nothing else is important enough to justify a 3.5 seems extreme.