From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19561 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2004 23:24:16 -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 19554 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2004 23:24:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sadr.equallogic.com) (66.155.203.134) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Jan 2004 23:24:15 -0000 Received: from sadr.equallogic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0DNOF6a011682 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:24:15 -0500 Received: from deneb.dev.equallogic.com (deneb [172.16.1.99]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0DNOFIg011677 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:24:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.equallogic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by deneb.dev.equallogic.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0DNOEm12540 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:24:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16388.32288.690096.480227@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:24:00 -0000 From: Paul Koning To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <200401132241.i0DMfbT28126@makai.watson.ibm.com> <202ADE61-461E-11D8-8072-000A95DA505C@dberlin.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00829.txt.bz2 >> * Correct code generation * Fewer ICEs * Standards conformance * >> Compilation speed * Performance * Features * Release frequency * >> Release timeliness >> >> We need to figure out how to balance those goals better without >> losing ground in areas where we recently have been improving. I can see why some of this ordering would be subject to disagreement, but I would hope that there also are partial orderings that are NOT debatable. The general rule of software engineering is that correctness comes first, performance and schedule after that. In the list above, "correctness" covers the first three, but they are not all the same. In my view, correct code generation is vastly more important than anything else. After that comes fewer ICEs. (ICEs are a pain but if there's a workaround, you can still get your job done. Bad code is much nastier because you may not realize you have a problem to work around.) As for standards conformance, I'm not sure I'd even that high enough to have it trump some of the performance things, but then again I'm not a language lawyer. In any case, is there any disagreement that correct code generation is absolutely the most important concern? If so, why? paul