Diego Novillo wrote:
Why not fix that before merging, then?
Because it is not a pass that is run by default, it is not receiving
active maintenance and the cost/benefit of doing it pre-merge is lower
than fixing the pass post-merge. If that is a problem, we can keep
delaying the merge until it's fixed, of course.
Normally, we try to get major new functionality to meet the
no-regression test before merging. However, I can see that in the case
of tuples it might be easier for everyone to stop having to worry about
tuplifying new code.
I think that someone, though, should be committed to fixing this pass
ASAP after it's checked in; waiting until late August to fix it seems
bad. Is there someone else who can commit to working on it as a high
priority after the main tuples checkin?
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
