But I think folks may be missing an important point. Poorly conceived and
designed features should be removed, or disabled. That goes for any
hunk of software, whether its the compiler, kernel, libraries, etc.
I wonder if folks fail to understand that the egcs project is picking
up an existing code base and trying to move forward. egcs did not make
the decision to include (for example) regparm in the first place. Had
it been our decision it *may* not have gone into the compiler.
In fact, several of us argued against regparm inclusion in gcc2 because
it could not be reliably implemented. But it went in anyway and was
documented and now leaves egcs holding the bag so to speak because
people are trying to use it and running into problems.
jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html