From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Mitchell To: bernds@redhat.co.uk Cc: jbuck@racerx.synopsys.com, lars@nocrew.org, meissner%cygnus.com.binutils@sources.redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: m68k MacOS target support? Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:11:00 -0000 Message-id: <20000912201049N.mitchell@codesourcery.com> References: <200009121814.LAA01174@racerx.synopsys.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00246.html >>>>> "Bernd" == Bernd Schmidt writes: Bernd> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Joe Buck wrote: >> A partially broken port doesn't have a negative impact on >> users of other ports. Bernd> However, it does have an impact on developers. For Bernd> example, I want to eliminate STRICT_LOW_PART from the Bernd> compiler. To do this, I'll need to fix all existing ports. Bernd> Likewise for any other global change that affects every Bernd> port. Yes -- and that was my point. I think everybody's right: Joe is correct that language extensions have more pervasive impact that old ports, and Bernd is right that even with back-ends there is a cost. I, too, have had to make more than one pass over every single machine description, and it is a pain -- especially since I know that some of the back-ends do not really work. -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com