Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-22 Thread Jeffrey Law
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

Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-22 Thread Daniel Berlin
On 3/21/07, Nicholas Nethercote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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

Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-21 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
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

Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-21 Thread Paul Brook
> Exactly. I'm viewing the mission statement as the moral equivalent of a > constitution -- the highest guidelines that you fall back on when > everything else fails. Your first paragraph above indicates that you view > it similarly. But it's currently so vague that I don't imagine it's much > u

Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-21 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Thu, 21 Mar 2007, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: I think you may misunderstand the mission statement. The mission statement is not a technical roadmap. It's a statement of general goals. If the community has a serious disagreement, the mission statement can sometimes help clarify matters. [...] T

Re: GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-21 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Nicholas Nethercote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > > GCC is a very ambitious compiler: > > > > - it supports a lot of platforms > > - it supports a lot of languages > > > > However, most users do not use most of those combinations. The > > probl

GCC priorities [Was Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?]

2007-03-20 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: GCC is a very ambitious compiler: - it supports a lot of platforms - it supports a lot of languages However, most users do not use most of those combinations. The problem is that supporting all these combinations hurts the specific combinations