https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43745

--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #13) 
> We just saw the maintainers rejecting PR49857 (which is about putting
> tree-switch-converted lookup-tables into flash / named AS) as "too
> specific".  The avr part was approved.  The only change to the middle-end
> was a well documented hook (statically) invoked only once in
> tree-switch-conversion module.  The maintainers proposed "more generic"
> solution; none of proposals would work and none of them would be more
> generic because the only object that's opt to such optimization is CSWTCH
> from tree-switch-conversion.
..
> 
> With that perspective and my recent impressions, I think working on avr-gcc
> has become a waste of time.

I know this perspective and impression is out of date (especially since that
was 8 years ago) and finally PR49857 has made it in after you spent many years
of trying to get it in. I know in the case of PR49857, this last patch review
was more of a slow review (I think 10 months from what I can tell) rather than
rejecting it right away. I wonder if there is a better way of improving this
situtation; not just with the slow reviews but also with important changes
needed to the middle-end that helps targets in general.

Reply via email to