--- Comment #5 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2007-06-18 03:15 ---
Hey, more good news about POINTER_PLUS. It might help smoke out bugs in other
parts of GCC. I hope these can be labeled as so called regressions so that
people will be forced to work on them.
Concerning non-regressio
--- Comment #4 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2007-06-18 02:53 ---
I realize that good things do not come easy.
I also believe there is over-reliance on regression among the gcc-insiders.
Enhancement has a priority below trivial and I am jut requesting a study of an
enhancement.
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-18 02:50 ---
No pointer plus will make it worse. It changes so many non tested parts of GCC
it is not funny. I added like 5 testcases to the testsuite because we were not
testing those parts. The reason why 4.2 was bad is not
--- Comment #2 from malitzke at metronets dot com 2007-06-18 02:47 ---
I am not making this request lightheartedly.
POINTER_PLUS was developed on a branch and went in very cleanly.
I always stressed to my students that that "A good theory is a most practical
thing" I just happen to to
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-18 02:27 ---
Unlike the TPA backport, pointer plus does not fix any regression (except from
3.4.0). Also it is a huge patch which is still going through some bug fixes
(C++ one and IV-OPTS one, and a SCEV one).
--
pinskia at
