On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > > I have not fixed every gcc backend to compile without producing any of > > the new warnings. I have fixed some: arm, i386, ia64, mips, pa, rs6000, > > s390, sparc, spu. This covers all the primary and secondary platforms, > > plus spu which I had to touch because I changed a target vector which it > > implements. > > Did you test the SPU compiler before you committed this? If you did > not test this, then you did not follow at all what new developers are > requested to do which is documented at > http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html. You can request someone to help > you out if you need a place to test the spu compiler but I did not see > that request before.
With experience one may judge exactly what testing is appropriate for complicated and wide-ranging patches (whether ones one submits or ones one approves) and declare what has been done when sending the patch. Verifying that cc1 builds is a common form of testing for some mechanical changes (though one might explicitly say in some cases that a certain amount of time is being left for target maintainers to object to the changes to their target). The instructions for contributors (much of which I wrote) are generally applicable to most changes and new developers would be well advised to check their contributions carefully against them, but they do not provide a perfect algorithm for determining exactly what should be done with every patch. (The legal requirements of FSF policy do however always have to be followed unless the FSF grants an exception in a particular case.) -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
