From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-89058-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 6749 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2004 03:20:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6742 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2004 03:20:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Jan 2004 03:20:49 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0H3Jlg20531;
	Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:19:47 -0500
Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0H3JkE12191;
	Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:19:46 -0500
Received: from dnovillo.cipe.redhat.com (dnovillo.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.0.106])
	by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0H3JjXd025614;
	Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:19:45 -0500
Subject: Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline
From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
To: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>,
   "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <200401170411.47313.s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
References: <10401170258.AA15628@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
	 <200401170411.47313.s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Red Hat Canada
Message-Id: <1074309583.3147.131.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 03:20:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01013.txt.bz2

On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 22:11, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Saturday 17 January 2004 03:58, Richard Kenner wrote:
> >     I would agree with you on principle.  But nobody is willing/able to
> >     update g77, and for Ada, everyone knows Kenner has done some work in
> >     this area but it's just not there and hasn't been for four years. So
> >     do you think we should wait until someone cares enough to make this
> >     transition?
> >
> > I'm curious where the "four years" come from.  GNAT has been around
> > for roughly ten years, but work on integrating it with GCC 3 (the only
> > version for which function-at-a-time makes sense) was just starting up
> > about 2.5 years ago.
> 
> The "four years" come from Diego.  That much time has past since he
> posted his first experimental tree-ssa patch.  I have to admit though
> that no-one could foresee back then what that patch would lead to...
> 
Three years, actually.  IIRC, I posted the initial implementation in
February 2001.


Diego.