On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:17 +1100, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Paul Brook wrote: > > > The problem is that I don't think writing a detailed "mission statement" is > > actually going to help anything. It's either going to be gcc contributors > > writing down what they're doing anyway, or something invented by the SC or > > FSF. I the latter case nothing's going to change because neither the SC nor > > the FSF have any practical means of compelling contributors to work on a > > particular feature. > > > > It's been said before that Mark (the GCC release manager) has no real power > > to > > make anything actually happen. All he can do is delay the release and hope > > things get better. > > Then it will continue to be interesting, if painful, to watch. True, but the structure you see is the only structure that (IMHO) could have worked for GCC. For better or worse, it is what it is.
If you've got ideas for how to change things for the better, they can certainly be discussed. In the end, everyone here just wants to build a better compiler -- they primarily differ in what "better" means. Jeff
