On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 04:14:17PM +0200, Duncan Sands
wrote:> Hi Jack,
>
> > Is there a timeline for when dragonegg might be
> > merged into gcc (4.6 perhaps)? I ask because FSF gcc
> > has allowed code in as technology previews before.
> > For instance, graphite really wasn't that usable in
> > gcc 4.4 and produced wrong code in the Polyhedron
> > 2005 benchmarks until gcc 4.5. So as long as it can bootstrap
> > gcc 4.6 and works in general, dragonegg should qualify
> > for inclusion as an experimental plugin.
>
> I hadn't really thought about adding dragonegg to the gcc codebase.
> What do you see as the advantages of doing so?
>
> Ciao,
>
> Duncan.
Duncan,
I thought that gcc plug-ins were meant to become part of
the FSF gcc source code, no? In any case, if dragonegg were
in the FSF gcc source code, it would have much higher
visibility and a better chance that some of the existing
FSF gcc developers would tinker with it on the side.
Jack
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev