>>>>> ">" == Dep, Khushil (GE Money) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I believe efforts to clarify and expand documentation is much more >> likely to entice new researchers and developers rather than a >> plugin system which no doubt would be poorly documented! This idea comes up a lot. I'm sympathetic to it -- it would have been really useful to me, a couple years ago, if GCC had had better documentation. However, the two things are not tradeable. It isn't as if we are deciding what to do with limited manpower. GCC as a project basically cannot do that. Rather, we're deciding what changes to accept. There are existing patches to add plugins, and, presumably, the interest and manpower to polish and maintain them. Sadly, there aren't ready patches to radically upgrade the documentation. It doesn't make sense to reject plugin patches on the basis that documentation would be preferable. I find it unlikely that this will cause more documentation to be written. Instead, I think the likely effect is that GCC will lose some potential developers. Tom
