Basile STARYNKEVITCH <bas...@starynkevitch.net> writes: > Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH >> >> Adding hooks just because you think they might be useful >> isn't the way to go. > > Then what is the correct way to enhance the current plugin API. There > are a lot of stuff missing there. > > I am not at all sure that all the experimental plugin work done so far > (in particular the ICI work inside MILEPOST and http://ctuning.org) > could fit into the existing plugin API. > > So if you think that adding hooks which can be useful and are not > costly (you forgot that second part of my proposal) is the wrong way > to work, what do you propose?
We should add hooks as we find plugins that need them. Simply adding a laundry list of hooks that we think might be needed will most likely cause us to overdesign. We know that we can write interesting plugins today, so we're not missing anything critical. I agree that it should be OK to add hooks in stage 3, if they are clearly safe and clearly needed. Ian
