public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Wilson <wilson@cygnus.com>
To: mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump)
Cc: egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: m68k structure packing
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 18:37:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <199710030137.SAA14454@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199710011915.MAA01070@kankakee.wrs.com>

I think you are suffering from some misconceptions here.

	I don't think we should force authors of code to prove to kenner that
	a change is good enough for the FSF's compiler, and then force them to
	go through the pain again to get it into the egcs compiler.

We don't.  Code that is accepted by Kenner into the FSF's compiler is
automatically accepted into EGCS unless there is something obviously wrong
with it.  In this case, there was something wrong with your patch that was
obvious to me but which Kenner apparently missed.  I don't think it is
unreasonable for me to point out problems which Kenner has apparently missed.

It turns out that it was a documentation problem and not a problem with your
patch, but the fact remains that there was a real problem here that needed to
be addressed.

	I think
	we risk faster divergence that way, and keeping them converged is
	better.

There was no chance of a divergence here.  If there was a problem with your
patch, I would have reported it to Kenner so that gcc2 and egcs could stay
in sync.

	I thought that kenner would be generally be harder to deal
	with, and while I may still generally think that is true, it wasn't in
	this case.

I am trying to be cooperative.  I realized that you didn't fully understand
what I wanted to see, so as soon as I could I spent several hours investigating
the problem myself and I posted the results of what I found to the list.
It was only 24 hours after I brought up the issue before I resolved it.
I don't think that 24 hours is an unresonable delay for this patch.

Jim

  parent reply	other threads:[~1997-10-02 18:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1997-10-01 12:16 Mike Stump
1997-10-01 12:39 ` Joel Sherrill
1997-10-02 18:37 ` Jim Wilson [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1997-10-01 15:08 Mike Stump
1997-10-01 15:56 ` Peter Barada
1997-10-01 16:16   ` Per Bothner
1997-10-02 20:14     ` Jim Wilson
1997-10-02  6:49   ` Paul Koning
1997-10-02 20:09   ` Jim Wilson
1997-10-02 20:01 ` Jim Wilson
1997-10-02 21:40   ` Richard Henderson
1997-09-30 21:42 Jim Wilson
1997-10-01  5:44 ` Kamil Iskra
1997-09-30 20:16 Mike Stump
1997-09-30 22:03 ` Jeffrey A Law
1997-09-30 16:58 Mike Stump
1997-09-30 18:20 ` Jim Wilson
1997-10-01  9:02   ` Peter Barada
1997-09-30 13:32 Mike Stump
1997-09-30 14:56 ` Jim Wilson
1997-09-30 12:08 Mike Stump
1997-09-30 12:57 ` Charles M. Hannum
1997-09-30 19:58 ` Jim Wilson
1997-09-30 21:13   ` Richard Henderson
1997-09-30 21:22   ` Jim Wilson
1997-10-01 15:14 ` Jim Wilson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=199710030137.SAA14454@cygnus.com \
    --to=wilson@cygnus.com \
    --cc=egcs@cygnus.com \
    --cc=mrs@wrs.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).