From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9426 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2004 22:34:09 -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 9419 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2004 22:34:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lon-mail-2.gradwell.net) (193.111.201.126) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2004 22:34:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 26740 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2004 22:34:08 -0000 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (postmaster%pop3.polyomino.org.uk@81.187.227.50) by lon-mail-2.gradwell.net with SMTP; 30 Aug 2004 22:34:08 -0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1C1uj1-000442-Sc; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:34:07 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:48:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk To: Robert Dewar cc: Richard Kenner , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Ada policy In-Reply-To: <4133A965.8040200@gnat.com> Message-ID: References: <10408302121.AA00131@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <4133A965.8040200@gnat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg01539.txt.bz2 On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Robert Dewar wrote: > 1. We submit fixes for bugs for which we have only proprietary > test cases, meaning that overall the quality of the Ada front > end will be higher, since for one thing, it will be far closer > to our in house tree for GNAT Pro (not quite indentical, since > there are things in the GNAT Pro tree that cannot go into the > FSF version for various reasons, related to FSF/GCC requirements, > not our requirements). Bugs shown by proprietary testcases should indeed be fixed. But each individual patch submission that can't include a testcase should include a statement of why (e.g. that the test is proprietary and a synthetic one not readily producable), and such bug fixes need more detailed explanations of what the problem was and why and how the patch addressed it, if not obvious, than bug fixes with included testcases, in case the patch causes problems and someone trying to address those problems needs to understand why the patch was needed in the first place. -- Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/ http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/#c90status - status of C90 for GCC 3.5 jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail) jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)