Weddington, Eric wrote:
-----Original Message----- From:
avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org
[mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. org]
On Behalf Of David Brown Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 7:04 AM To:
avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Re: char to int
promotion in bitwise operators
Has anyone versed in avr-gcc development looked at the new plugin
architecture in gcc 4.5 ?
Yes. IMHO, it's a waste of time.
That's a pity. It looked like a good idea - it's certainly something
many other gcc developers have been asking for for years. But it
certainly seems that most discussion about plugins has been somewhat
paranoid concern about people being able to use then to get around the
GPL, rather than actually getting them working as well as possible.
<snip>
I would hope it is also possible to use plugins to allow extra
peephole optimisations to be written and tested externally to gcc,
allowing much easier and faster testing than rebuilding gcc for
each change. Well-proven peepholes could then be moved back into
the main gcc code for efficiency.
The issue has nothing to do with how fast or slow it is to write gcc
code. The issue is having people willing to take the time to actually
do anything.
I had hoped that plugins might lower the bar for people getting
involved, by making it possible for people to look at a smaller piece of
code at first rather than facing the whole gcc source tree. But maybe
plugins just add another layer of complexity without actually helping.
mvh.,
David
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
