On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 16:17, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2005 16:53, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > > The problem is, a bloated GCC has no consequences for the majority of > > GCC developers -- their employers have other (and valid) concerns. It's > > less a matter of laziness than it is of not caring outside one's own > > backyard. > > And to second your point in an awkward way: I don't see this as a > problem. If all those people who think this is a problem would > also fund GCC development (with hard cash or with developers), who > knows, probably things would look different.
if only it were that simple[1]. However, even if the money does get spent it's unlikely to help because there are too many developers that just DON'T CARE about (or worse, seem to be openly hostile to) making the compiler more efficient. No company is going to spend money on fixing this until we adjust our (collective) attitude and take this seriously. If one person can continue to undo the good work of a dozen others with one lousy commit we'll never get anywhere here. R. [1] Spending money is never simple ;-)
