Rana Dasgupta wrote:
If the code is not being exercised by day to day tests and maintained,
or if
we are not developing it, we can drop it I think. GCV4.1 is in the first
category, and GCV5 the second. GCV4 doesn't fit either. Dropping it doesn't
stop one from pulling it out of an old svn revision for personal use.
I don't grok what you mean - gcv4.1 is our main GC right now, right?
geir
Thanks,
Rana
On 11/2/06, Ivan Volosyuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would like to know the opinion of Artem, Salikh and Alexey
Ignatenko. They have used the GC and may have reasons to keep it.
As for me, I occasionally use it (GCv4) and a modified version of
GCv4.1 (which can help detect heap access via lost pointers). Most of
the time I prefer second one, but sometimes it is helpful to run with
completely different code base. I didn't try GCv5 yet. If it stable I
will switch to it.
--
Ivan
On 11/2/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any reason to keep this around in the main branch?
