From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-93988-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 20365 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2004 14:15:54 -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 20317 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2004 14:15:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Apr 2004 14:15:47 -0000
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BArMa-0007ek-J6; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 10:15:40 -0400
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:15:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org>
Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu>,
	stl@caltech.edu, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Of Bounties and Mercenaries
Message-ID: <20040406141540.GA29206@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org>,
	Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>,
	Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu>, stl@caltech.edu,
	gcc@gcc.gnu.org
References: <40727602.2080502@gnat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404060906420.1609-100000@nondot.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404060906420.1609-100000@nondot.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i
X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00278.txt.bz2

On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 09:07:48AM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> > Chris Lattner wrote:
> > > Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > >>The other problem with this is that "Modern" "Standard" C++ has the
> > >>following problems:
> > >>1. Makes a mess out of simplifying code from the compiling when the
> > >>compiler is being miscompiled itself.
> > >
> > >
> > > Huh?
> >
> > If you really don't understand the above point 1, that's surprising.
> > Have you ever actually worked through problems in a self-compiling
> > bootstrapped compiler? Or are you just arguing language merits?
> 
> No, I just can't parse the english statement.  Can Andrew or someone else
> restate?

Sure: I believe what Andrew is saying is that when you have a failure
in the stage2 compiler, i.e. a miscompiled compiler, it becomes
substantially harder to diagnose and minimise.

Whether that's true or not I don't know.  It's plausible.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer