From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13221 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2004 00:01:09 -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 13213 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2004 00:01:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO desire.geoffk.org) (67.169.96.182) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Jan 2004 00:01:08 -0000 Received: from desire.geoffk.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by desire.geoffk.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0E016Q0029225; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:01:06 -0800 Received: (from geoffk@localhost) by desire.geoffk.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0E015nN029221; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:01:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: desire.geoffk.org: geoffk set sender to geoffk@geoffk.org using -f To: Paul Koning CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <200401132241.i0DMfbT28126@makai.watson.ibm.com> <202ADE61-461E-11D8-8072-000A95DA505C@dberlin.org> <16388.32288.690096.480227@gargle.gargle.HOWL> From: Geoff Keating Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <16388.32288.690096.480227@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00835.txt.bz2 Paul Koning writes: > >> * Correct code generation * Fewer ICEs * Standards conformance * > >> Compilation speed * Performance * Features * Release frequency * > >> Release timeliness > >> > >> We need to figure out how to balance those goals better without > >> losing ground in areas where we recently have been improving. > > I can see why some of this ordering would be subject to disagreement, > but I would hope that there also are partial orderings that are NOT > debatable. > > The general rule of software engineering is that correctness comes > first, performance and schedule after that. I don't believe that statement is correct as an absolute. For instance, a product that never ships is *not* better than a product that ships with bugs. It is significantly worse. Likewise, a product that is guaranteed to produce the correct answer, but will take 400 years, is much worse than a product that has a 99% chance of producing the correct answer in 10 minutes. -- - Geoffrey Keating