On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 March 2012 15:35, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
I am not sure what you expect from me. As I said many times, I have not a
global understanding of GCC (the global reviewers have a much better
global
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:39:40 +1000
Peter Dolding oia...@gmail.com wrote:
The top level modules already exist and are named.
Not really. I see nowhere on the GCC site a picture as clear as
the plateform
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Peter Dolding oia...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:39:40 +1000
Peter Dolding oia...@gmail.com wrote:
The top level modules already exist and are named.
Not
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. There is also different module hierarchies that overlap. For
example ILs used in the different parts of the compiler.
I think Basile is mostly confused about what files belong to what module,
a
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:57:08AM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
Indeed. There is also different module hierarchies that overlap. For
example ILs used in the different parts of the compiler.
I think Basile is mostly confused about what files belong to what module,
a question with not a
Em 21/03/2012 08:58, Peter Dolding escreveu:
If there is a grey area you have broken into modules wrong. Module
based code has no grey. No grey equals less errors of person editing
a file they think is exclusive to some part that turns out to be
shared with another part so causing nasty
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Pedro Lamarão
pedro.lama...@prodist.com.br wrote:
Em 21/03/2012 08:58, Peter Dolding escreveu:
If there is a grey area you have broken into modules wrong. Module
based code has no grey. No grey equals less errors of person editing
a file they think is
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
Sorry people, we don't have any established list of named modules. I see
nowhere a list of one or two dozens of modules with for each of them:
* a name
* short description in one or two sentences
*
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:24:54AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
Sorry people, we don't have any established list of named modules. I see
nowhere a list of one or two dozens of modules with for each of
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:57:08AM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
Indeed. There is also different module hierarchies that overlap. For
example ILs used in the different parts of the compiler.
I think
On 21 March 2012 15:35, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
I am not sure what you expect from me. As I said many times, I have not a
global understanding of GCC (the global reviewers have a much better
global understanding than I do). So I cannot propose or initiate a list of
modules.
Or do you
Very well said. Discussing about modules also makes no sense. Figure out
the present state.
these kind of meta discussions are very rarely of value, this
one is no exception IMO
Richard.
--
P.
On 3/21/2012 11:35 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
I would be happy to help, but please understand that my understanding of GCC
is restricted to gengtype, ggc, and some parts of the middle-end. I know
nothing about the vast rest of the GCC compiler.
Perhaps suggestions about improvements in
On Mar 19, 2012 5:56 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:49:24 +
Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2012 16:56, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* a garbage collector. Even a modular GCC need some memory management
policy (and
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:49:24 +
Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2012 16:56, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* a garbage collector. Even a modular GCC need some memory management
On 3/18/2012 12:56 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* you can name and count the modules of a software
Well in a hierarchical system this is not so clear, since modules may
exist at different levels of abstraction. For instance in a compiler,
at one level of abstraction, the front end is a
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:11:05 -0400
Robert Dewar de...@adacore.com wrote:
On 3/18/2012 12:56 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* you can name and count the modules of a software
Well in a hierarchical system this is not so clear, since modules may
exist at different levels of
On 18 March 2012 16:56, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* a garbage collector. Even a modular GCC need some memory management
policy (and
ref-counting à la GTK, or à la std::shared_ptr is not enough IMHO inside a
compiler
because a compiler has much more complex and circular data structures,
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:49:24 +
Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 March 2012 16:56, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
* a garbage collector. Even a modular GCC need some memory management
policy (and
ref-counting à la GTK, or à la std::shared_ptr is not enough IMHO
19 matches
Mail list logo
