From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17193 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2004 12:15:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 17186 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2004 12:15:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.johnrshannon.com) (69.20.155.49) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Jan 2004 12:15:25 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.johnrshannon.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.johnrshannon.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BD517539 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:15:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail.johnrshannon.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.johnrshannon.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20018-02 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:15:22 -0700 (MST) Received: from 192-168-1-22.mobile.johnrshannon.com (192-168-1-22.mobile.johnrshannon.com [192.168.1.22]) by mail.johnrshannon.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EE3174A9 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:15:20 -0700 (MST) Received: by 192-168-1-22.mobile.johnrshannon.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0D2704D4; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:15:20 -0700 (MST) From: "John R. Shannon" Reply-To: john@johnrshannon.com Organization: johnrshannon.com To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:15:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <200401170610.i0H6AEBX027059@speedy.slc.redhat.com> <4009257C.6080204@gnat.com> In-Reply-To: <4009257C.6080204@gnat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: clearsigned data Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200401170515.19512.john@johnrshannon.com> X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01041.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 17 January 2004 05:07 am, Robert Dewar wrote: > law@redhat.com wrote: > > In message <10401170230.AA15232@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>, Richard Kenner > > writes: > > > > Given the lack of movement on that front, how can we realistically expe= ct > > any movement on something like tree-ssa? Particularly when tree-ssa > > depends on function at a time mode? > > > > Given the lack of movement from the Ada maintainers on that front, can = we > > realistically consider the Ada front-end even maintained, except perhaps > > in a bugfix mode? As an Ada user, and one following the 3.4 tree, I have to disagree about no= =20 movement on the Ada front. The code is under development. The changes from= =20 3.3.2 are significant. P.S.: gcc 3.4 Ada builds under NetBSD-CURRENT on Ix86. Current 8 errors (no= ne=20 in tasking) from check Ada. - --=20 John R. Shannon john@johnrshannon.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkAJJ1UACgkQOKbCxya4HYtW0QCgl2wFzA0twvAB8JwYeslWqvtT QtgAn3ak7KBz9iKcSP8zhvUNwt7nbs55 =3Da0/p -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----