public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de
Cc: espie@quatramaran.ens.fr, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: elided copy constructors
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 09:50:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <199903201752.JAA04517@adsl-206-170-148-33.dsl.pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: < 199903201510.QAA08826@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de >(martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de)

>>>>> "Martin" == Martin v Loewis <martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:

    Martin> I think here lies a terrible danger. IMHO, the only option
    Martin> that is guaranteed to work is option 1, and even then only
    Martin> if the amount of money is good enough so that the right
    Martin> people get involved.

Let's not over-analyze.  I've received enough criticism about the way
I wrote option two (asking us nicely to fix it) that I've rewritten
that entry, to get a different tone:

  o Report the problem to egcs-bugs and hope that someone will be kind
    enough to fix it for you.  While this is certainly possible, and
    sometimes happens, there is no guarantee that it will.  You should
    not expect the same response from egcs-bugs that you would see
    from a commercial support organization since the people who read
    egcs-bugs, if they choose to help you, will be volunteering their
    time.  This alternative will work best if you can make your bug
    report as easy to read as possible.  (See <how to write a bug
    report FAQ entry>.)

But, of course, different things will work for different people.  My
goal was to produce a FAQ entry that would give people a clue about
their options, and I still think I succeeded.  I, for one, know that I
have fixed bugs in my code simply out of a feeling of responsibilty;
Martin, I know that you have done the same.  On the other hand, some
of us are both reasonably competent compiler programmers; most people
are probably not willing to dive too far into GCC.  Marc Espie
criticized me for encouraging people to do this, saying that some
people are just unable.  That may or may not be true, but I don't
think this is the forum for that discussion.  People can make that
judgement for themselves; people who know nothing of compilers are
unlikely to dive right in just because I said it's possible.

I think we agree that the three alternatives I listed are the obvious
choices; let's get them in, as FAQ entry, so that we have something to
point "When will this get done?" questions at that's a bit more polite
than just "When you do it yourself!".  Also, some people may not know
that commercial support is available, or what alternatives exist in
that arena; we would all benefit if more people utilized this option
in that we would see more improvements to GCC.

-- 
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de
Cc: espie@quatramaran.ens.fr, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: elided copy constructors
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <199903201752.JAA04517@adsl-206-170-148-33.dsl.pacbell.net> (raw)
Message-ID: <19990331234600.m9PHwYeXHdHz5Ji14D0gwFKAKTPtswllL4KU_ZnPKHg@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199903201510.QAA08826@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>

>>>>> "Martin" == Martin v Loewis <martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:

    Martin> I think here lies a terrible danger. IMHO, the only option
    Martin> that is guaranteed to work is option 1, and even then only
    Martin> if the amount of money is good enough so that the right
    Martin> people get involved.

Let's not over-analyze.  I've received enough criticism about the way
I wrote option two (asking us nicely to fix it) that I've rewritten
that entry, to get a different tone:

  o Report the problem to egcs-bugs and hope that someone will be kind
    enough to fix it for you.  While this is certainly possible, and
    sometimes happens, there is no guarantee that it will.  You should
    not expect the same response from egcs-bugs that you would see
    from a commercial support organization since the people who read
    egcs-bugs, if they choose to help you, will be volunteering their
    time.  This alternative will work best if you can make your bug
    report as easy to read as possible.  (See <how to write a bug
    report FAQ entry>.)

But, of course, different things will work for different people.  My
goal was to produce a FAQ entry that would give people a clue about
their options, and I still think I succeeded.  I, for one, know that I
have fixed bugs in my code simply out of a feeling of responsibilty;
Martin, I know that you have done the same.  On the other hand, some
of us are both reasonably competent compiler programmers; most people
are probably not willing to dive too far into GCC.  Marc Espie
criticized me for encouraging people to do this, saying that some
people are just unable.  That may or may not be true, but I don't
think this is the forum for that discussion.  People can make that
judgement for themselves; people who know nothing of compilers are
unlikely to dive right in just because I said it's possible.

I think we agree that the three alternatives I listed are the obvious
choices; let's get them in, as FAQ entry, so that we have something to
point "When will this get done?" questions at that's a bit more polite
than just "When you do it yourself!".  Also, some people may not know
that commercial support is available, or what alternatives exist in
that arena; we would all benefit if more people utilized this option
in that we would see more improvements to GCC.

-- 
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~1999-03-20  9:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1999-03-19 14:23 E. Robert Tisdale
     [not found] ` < 36F2CDC1.8B4FEC4A@netwood.net >
1999-03-19 15:18   ` Martin v. Loewis
     [not found]     ` < 199903192313.AAA00798@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de >
1999-03-19 15:54       ` Mark Mitchell
     [not found]         ` < 199903192356.PAA03038@adsl-206-170-148-33.dsl.pacbell.net >
1999-03-19 19:20           ` Tim Hollebeek
1999-03-31 23:46             ` Tim Hollebeek
1999-03-20  6:26           ` espie
     [not found]             ` < 19990320142609.15873.qmail@quatramaran.ens.fr >
1999-03-20  7:18               ` Martin v. Loewis
     [not found]                 ` < 199903201510.QAA08826@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de >
1999-03-20  9:50                   ` Mark Mitchell [this message]
     [not found]                     ` < 199903201752.JAA04517@adsl-206-170-148-33.dsl.pacbell.net >
1999-03-20 11:16                       ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46                         ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46                     ` Mark Mitchell
1999-03-31 23:46                 ` Martin v. Loewis
1999-03-31 23:46             ` espie
1999-03-21  6:09           ` Gerald Pfeifer
1999-03-28  9:45             ` Mark Mitchell
1999-03-29 12:50               ` Gerald Pfeifer
1999-03-31 23:46                 ` Gerald Pfeifer
1999-03-31 23:46               ` Mark Mitchell
1999-03-31 23:46             ` Gerald Pfeifer
1999-03-21  8:41           ` New webpage? Providing egcs support Gerald Pfeifer
     [not found]             ` < Pine.GSO.4.10.9903211733410.1651-100000@markab.dbai.tuwien.ac.at >
1999-03-21  9:38               ` Mark Mitchell
1999-03-31 23:46                 ` Mark Mitchell
1999-03-21 11:08               ` Jeffrey A Law
1999-03-31 23:46                 ` Jeffrey A Law
1999-03-31 23:46             ` Gerald Pfeifer
1999-03-31 23:46         ` elided copy constructors Mark Mitchell
1999-03-31 23:46     ` Martin v. Loewis
1999-03-31 23:46 ` E. Robert Tisdale
1999-03-19 15:37 Timmy Mulligins
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Timmy Mulligins
     [not found] <36F2CDC1.8B4FEC4A.cygnus.egcs@netwood.net>
1999-03-20  1:12 ` Jason Merrill
1999-03-31 23:46   ` Jason Merrill

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=199903201752.JAA04517@adsl-206-170-148-33.dsl.pacbell.net \
    --to=mark@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=egcs@egcs.cygnus.com \
    --cc=espie@quatramaran.ens.fr \
    --cc=martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de \
    /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).