From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.COM>
Cc: Bernd Schmidt <bernds@redhat.com>,
David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Loop unroll fixes
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:11:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010917151142.A30386@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200109172124.OAA11113@atrus.synopsys.com>
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 02:24:32PM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> So how about requiring such documentation as part of the patch?
Fine by me.
> but at least some explanation of what is going wrong, what the patch does,
> and why this is the right thing would make patch reviewers' lives easier
> and probably improve the quality of gcc.
In addition, it aids debugging future problems as well.
Suppose the patch is wrong in some way that causes it to fail for
some obscure target under some conditions. Suppose this is not
discovered for a year. If the patch is well documented, one can
quickly recall what the original problem was, as opposed to either
(1) spending lots of time re-examining the original bug, or
(2) guessing the that the old patch was wrong and reverting it.
Both (1) and (2) have happened many times in gcc history.
r~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-17 15:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200109142021.QAA26236@makai.watson.ibm.com>
2001-09-15 8:57 ` Bernd Schmidt
2001-09-17 13:16 ` Richard Henderson
2001-09-17 14:24 ` Joe Buck
2001-09-17 15:11 ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2001-09-17 17:22 ` Mark Mitchell
2001-09-18 2:19 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-10-10 1:12 Wolfgang Bangerth
2001-10-10 1:16 ` Mark Mitchell
2001-10-10 5:14 ` Franz Sirl
2001-10-10 11:08 ` Mark Mitchell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-09-18 17:36 Richard Kenner
2001-09-18 11:54 mike stump
2001-09-18 12:34 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-09-19 11:28 ` Joe Buck
2001-09-24 9:31 ` law
2001-09-18 10:47 Benjamin Kosnik
2001-09-18 4:16 Richard Kenner
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109141957550.29416-100000@host140.cambridge.redhat.com>
2001-09-14 14:36 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-13 16:35 Zoltan Hidvegi
2001-09-13 18:58 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-13 23:50 ` Jim Wilson
2001-09-14 6:55 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-09-14 12:15 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-09-14 16:45 ` Jim Wilson
2001-09-14 20:11 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-14 22:23 ` Jim Wilson
2001-09-15 2:42 ` Bernd Schmidt
2001-09-14 21:16 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-09-14 9:41 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-14 10:46 ` Bernd Schmidt
2001-09-14 11:47 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-14 17:54 ` Jim Wilson
2001-09-14 18:35 ` David Edelsohn
2001-09-14 19:56 ` Jim Wilson
2001-09-15 2:56 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-10-04 6:46 ` Franz Sirl
2001-10-04 7:40 ` Mark Mitchell
2001-10-04 20:46 ` Jim Wilson
2001-10-04 20:51 ` Mark Mitchell
2001-10-04 23:10 ` Zoltan Hidvegi
2001-10-10 0:05 ` Mark Mitchell
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=20010917151142.A30386@redhat.com \
--to=rth@redhat.com \
--cc=bernds@redhat.com \
--cc=dje@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jbuck@synopsys.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).