From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-67214-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 13426 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2003 23:59:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13418 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2003 23:59:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO monkey.daikokuya.co.uk) (213.152.55.49)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2003 23:59:32 -0000
Received: from neil by monkey.daikokuya.co.uk with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 18eOaW-0003it-00; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 23:59:20 +0000
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:30:00 -0000
From: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk>
To: Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com>
Cc: Mike Stump <mstump@apple.com>, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>,
	gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC 3.3, GCC 3.4
Message-ID: <20030130235920.GA14300@daikokuya.co.uk>
References: <20030130202129.GB12150@daikokuya.co.uk> <3EFC71B9-34A9-11D7-8309-003065A77310@apple.com> <20030130233824.GA14045@daikokuya.co.uk> <20030130235501.GA22689@disaster.jaj.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030130235501.GA22689@disaster.jaj.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01695.txt.bz2

Phil Edwards wrote:-

> I detect the note of frustration, but I think this is an experiment
> worth making.  Say, allow --with-gc=none (re-allow?) to choose ggc-none.c,
> and see what happens.
> 
> Perhaps the compiler need only turn on GC at all once a threshold number
> of... something... has been passed.  (Statements?  Tree nodes created?
> Dunno.)

Whatever we do, the worst thing is to make GCC non-deterministic.

Someone suggested this (Geoff?) and someone else (Mike I think!) pointed
out what a bad idea this was.

Neil.