On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 12:11:48PM -0800, George Vasick wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:24:13AM -0800, George Vasick wrote: > >>There is testing and potentially support. > > > >Support means the same thing for GCJ and GNAT as for GCC: we'll keep the > >thing up to date as new versions come out. Support need not mean "we'll > >fix any bugs in GCJ and/or GNAT before the GCC community does." > > > >If it builds and passes its own tests (this shouldn't take long to > >verify, and we have an attestation that it does) then including it costs > >*nothing* on the margin. > > I guess I disagree with this. It costs nothing right up to the point > where you are the one doing it and you run into a problem.
But you haven't even tried! > >Are you actually improving GCC performance on Solaris by modifying GCC? > > Yes, by hooking up the GCC frontends with the Studio Sparc backends. > The plain GCC backend will be available under flag control. Fine. That shouldn't interfere with GCJ/GNAT, as long as you test using the GCC backend. > >If so, are you saying that this makes it harder to ensure that GCJ and > >GNAT function properly? I could see that. > > Potentially yes, although we could choose to support the plain gcc > backend only for these languages. We currently do this for Fortran. Right.
