* what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
@ 2004-12-02 12:22 Jonathan Wilson
2004-12-02 12:54 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Wilson @ 2004-12-02 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
I see lots of references to some targets being the "primary targets" (which
I assume means that those backends are the ones the GCC folk consider the
most important) but which targets are these?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 12:22 what are the "primary targets" for GCC? Jonathan Wilson
@ 2004-12-02 12:54 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-12-02 12:58 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Carlini @ 2004-12-02 12:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Wilson; +Cc: gcc, Gerald Pfeifer
Hi,
> I see lots of references to some targets being the "primary targets"
> (which I assume means that those backends are the ones the GCC folk
> consider the most important) but which targets are these?
indeed, this is a good question.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like we don't have anymore (easily
reachable, at least) something similar to:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010203180300/gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.0/criteria.html
In any case,
http://gcc.gnu.org/testing/
mentions "the primary evaluation platforms listed in the current release
criteria"...
Gerald?
Paolo.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 12:22 what are the "primary targets" for GCC? Jonathan Wilson
2004-12-02 12:54 ` Paolo Carlini
@ 2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-12-02 14:01 ` Jonathan Wilson
1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Steven Bosscher @ 2004-12-02 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Wilson; +Cc: gcc
On Dec 02, 2004 01:25 PM, Jonathan Wilson <jonwil@tpgi.com.au> wrote:
> I see lots of references to some targets being the "primary targets" (which
> I assume means that those backends are the ones the GCC folk consider the
> most important) but which targets are these?
That depends from release to release. For GCC 3.4 you can find the
list on http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/criteria.html under the header
"Platform Support". Same for GCC 3.3 and earlier.
(Interesting nit: The criteria for GCC 3.4 are still only a draft
according to that page ;-)).
There are no documented GCC 4.0.0 Release Criteria yet, and I don't
know who is responsible for proposing the criteria and approving them.
Until somebody proposes something I suppose the "primary targets" are
just those which are the most important historically or from the point
of view of the majority of the contributors (x86*-linux, MIPS, HPPA,
powerpc*, HPPA, maybe Alpha, maybe ARM, at least one *BSD target, ...).
Gr.
Steven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
@ 2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-12-02 17:16 ` Joe Buck
2004-12-02 19:55 ` Mike Stump
2004-12-02 14:01 ` Jonathan Wilson
1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Giovanni Bajo @ 2004-12-02 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher; +Cc: gcc
Steven Bosscher <stevenb@suse.de> wrote:
>> I see lots of references to some targets being the "primary targets"
(which
>> I assume means that those backends are the ones the GCC folk consider the
>> most important) but which targets are these?
> There are no documented GCC 4.0.0 Release Criteria yet, and I don't
> know who is responsible for proposing the criteria and approving them.
> Until somebody proposes something I suppose the "primary targets" are
> just those which are the most important historically or from the point
> of view of the majority of the contributors (x86*-linux, MIPS, HPPA,
> powerpc*, HPPA, maybe Alpha, maybe ARM, at least one *BSD target, ...).
I asked the SC a clarification on the release criteria for 4.x here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-10/msg01229.html
but got no answer.
--
Giovanni Bajo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
@ 2004-12-02 17:16 ` Joe Buck
2004-12-02 17:52 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-12-02 19:55 ` Mike Stump
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Joe Buck @ 2004-12-02 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Giovanni Bajo; +Cc: Steven Bosscher, gcc
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 02:36:22PM +0100, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> I asked the SC a clarification on the release criteria for 4.x here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-10/msg01229.html
>
> but got no answer.
An answer will take some time to produce.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-12-02 17:16 ` Joe Buck
@ 2004-12-02 19:55 ` Mike Stump
2004-12-02 22:46 ` Joe Buck
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Mike Stump @ 2004-12-02 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Giovanni Bajo; +Cc: Steven Bosscher, gcc
On Dec 2, 2004, at 5:36 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> I asked the SC a clarification on the release criteria for 4.x here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-10/msg01229.html
>
> but got no answer.
I don't feel they have to answer these questions. If they feel any
specific one is compelling to them, they should of course state a
direction for us to move in; otherwise, the answers to your questions
can be a consensus view of the people doing the work in gcc combined
with what work people sign up to actually do. Someone can propose
numbers and criteria and solicit feedback. The RM has the latitude to
push us in that direction, or this one and to publish any such list as
he sees fit.
For example, I propose that we consider Darwin a primary platform.
This isn't crucial or critical, but, I think reflects reality better.
I propose that 25% speed regressions at -O0 are beyond what we consider
ok. I think we can conservatively say that 4% might be more reasonable
and reflective of the current climate.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 19:55 ` Mike Stump
@ 2004-12-02 22:46 ` Joe Buck
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Joe Buck @ 2004-12-02 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Stump; +Cc: Giovanni Bajo, Steven Bosscher, gcc
> On Dec 2, 2004, at 5:36 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> > I asked the SC a clarification on the release criteria for 4.x here:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-10/msg01229.html
> >
> > but got no answer.
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 11:54:58AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> I don't feel they have to answer these questions.
Nevertheless, the SC is attempting to come up with an answer. Patience,
please.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
@ 2004-12-02 14:01 ` Jonathan Wilson
2004-12-02 17:15 ` Joe Buck
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Wilson @ 2004-12-02 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher; +Cc: gcc
> That depends from release to release. For GCC 3.4 you can find the
> list on http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/criteria.html under the header
> "Platform Support". Same for GCC 3.3 and earlier.
ok, that page seems like what I want.
The only noted difference between 3.3 and 3.4 seems to be the AIX target
which has been bumped up for 3.4 (presumably because a new version of AIX
appeared)
I wonder why apple (i.e. OSX/darwin) is not a primary platform for GCC
(given that GCC is the primary compiler for that plaform).
I guess it is because apple keeps a local branch of GCC with all sorts of
apple fixes in them.
Personally, I would love to see the win32 GCC (mingw) target be given a
higher priority (although that would rely on the mingw team being more
perpared to keep things going) as this target is (AFAIK) the best currently
available option as far as a free as in speech compiler for the windows
platform goes.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: what are the "primary targets" for GCC?
2004-12-02 14:01 ` Jonathan Wilson
@ 2004-12-02 17:15 ` Joe Buck
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Joe Buck @ 2004-12-02 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Wilson; +Cc: Steven Bosscher, gcc
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:04:40PM +0800, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> I wonder why apple (i.e. OSX/darwin) is not a primary platform for GCC
> (given that GCC is the primary compiler for that plaform).
> I guess it is because apple keeps a local branch of GCC with all sorts of
> apple fixes in them.
The real reason is that the list of platforms has not been updated in a
long time, and was first made before anything called "Darwin" existed.
Yes, revisions are overdue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-02 22:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-12-02 12:22 what are the "primary targets" for GCC? Jonathan Wilson
2004-12-02 12:54 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-12-02 12:58 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-12-02 12:57 ` Steven Bosscher
2004-12-02 13:37 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-12-02 17:16 ` Joe Buck
2004-12-02 17:52 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-12-02 19:55 ` Mike Stump
2004-12-02 22:46 ` Joe Buck
2004-12-02 14:01 ` Jonathan Wilson
2004-12-02 17:15 ` Joe Buck
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).