From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14724 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2004 01:26:34 -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 14639 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 01:26:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 01:26:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 16956 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 01:26:26 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.101?) (mitchell@127.0.0.1) by mail.codesourcery.com with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 01:26:26 -0000 Message-ID: <41A291BF.6040007@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:31:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Diego Novillo CC: Kazu Hirata , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: Mainline in regression-fix mode after Thanksgiving References: <200411230026.iAN0QqeO005220@sirius.codesourcery.com> <20041122.201559.34387675.kazu@cs.umass.edu> <1101172833.24001.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1101172833.24001.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00782.txt.bz2 Diego Novillo wrote: > On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 20:15 -0500, Kazu Hirata wrote: > > >>Are compile-time regressions considered to be regressions? I am >>guessing the answer is "no" to be on the safe side. >> > > I certainly hope they are. Several PRs are of this nature and compile > time problems are among the #1 complaints I've heard about mainline. Yes, compile-time regressions are OK -- but let's be circumspect. For example, Nathan's bitmap patches are probably more aggressive than I'd like after this goes into effect. Things that are less far-reaching and have less associated murkyness would be better. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC mark@codesourcery.com (916) 791-8304