From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10977 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2007 23:50:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 10969 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2007 23:50:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:50:42 +0000 Received: from zps77.corp.google.com (zps77.corp.google.com [172.25.146.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id lAFNoa0R024310 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:50:37 GMT Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (pybu52.prod.google.com [10.34.97.52]) by zps77.corp.google.com with ESMTP id lAFNnJxI001460 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:50:36 -0800 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u52so5112288pyb for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:50:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.73.16 with SMTP id a16mr2739337qbl.1195170635366; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:50:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from legolas.novillo.homelinux.org ( [99.229.48.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e17sm1642005qbe.2007.11.15.15.50.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:50:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <473CDB49.5000400@google.com> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:24:00 -0000 From: Diego Novillo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Kenner CC: Joe.Buck@synopsys.com, fleury@labri.fr, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, iant@google.com Subject: Re: Progress on GCC plugins ? References: <47317545.2070708@labri.fr> <20071107164101.GB4550@synopsys.com> <473C9F4E.5090402@google.com> <10711152024.AA00627@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <10711152143.AA02989@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <473CBFAD.9060400@google.com> <10711152249.AA04042@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <473CCE1B.2090202@google.com> <10711152337.AA04820@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> In-Reply-To: <10711152337.AA04820@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00412.txt.bz2 Richard Kenner wrote: > No, I mean for *testing* you need to do a bootstrap. I'm not talking > about the minimum actually needed to build. Nope, you don't. If you are doing static analysis, for instance, you don't care nor need to bootstrap GCC. You just need to load your module every time a file is compiled. If you are doing a pass that you are testing and/or prototyping, you don't want to waste time rebuilding the whole compiler. If/when your pass reaches certain maturity, you think it's ready for production, and people think it's a good idea to have it in the compiler, then you convert it into a static pass and you go through the traditional bootstrap process. Similarly, for visualization plug-ins, you don't want/need to bootstrap the compiler. That's the core idea with plug-ins, they allow more flexibility for experimentation. They are not a means for implementing permanent features in the compiler. We would not guarantee ABI nor API stability, there is just no point to doing that. Diego.