Steven Bosscher wrote: > Mark just made an ICE in the compiler with non-default options a P1 > bug for GCC 4.5 (xf. > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2010-02/msg01695.html). > > Can someone please explain why this kind of bug should be of > release-blocking priority?
As I wrote in the PR, I want to understand what kind of "broken" applies to this pass. To be clear, I have no idea whether the pass is perfect, totally wrong, or just a bit buggy. I'm not casting any aspersions whatsoever. I'm responding to your comment in the PR that the patch is broken. Shipping a compiler with an option that we know is just a piece of junk is a bad idea. It's one to ship an experimental option, or a "technology preview"; it's another to ship something that's no good to anybody. As a responsible software distributor, we should disable such things in our releases. GCC *developers* can always hack the source if they want to play with the feature, but GCC *users* shouldn't look at the manual, turn on some option that we know doesn't work, and then have the compiler blow up. I consider it P1 to understand what the situation is here. That doesn't mean we should fix the ICE. The right outcome might be to disable the pass, or to do nothing at all. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery m...@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713
