Re: GNAT and GCC 3.0

[lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Robert Dewar wrote:
>We also have the problem of continued patches to GCC breaking things.
>Hopefully soon, more people will be building GNAT to test their changes,
>and that will help.

This requires a testsuite in the gcc-CVS. Currently it can't be tested and
known failtures can't be added to the testsuite, because there is none.

>watching the gcc mailing list. In general I would advise anyone interested
>in picking up GNAT snapshots from gnu.org to subscribe to the relevant
>lists, and get a feel for what is going on.

Of course. But I'd prefer a checked compiler after bootstrapping.

>Certainly Ron Cole was free, as was anyone else, to get 3.13 running on
>3.1 (the issues of getting 3.13 running are identical to those of getting
>later versions to run, and as above, the problems are in gcc, not in
>gnat).

gcc3.1 does produce much better code than gnat3.13. That's a real reason to
switch. Especially pos_to_rep Implementation of enums are considerably
enhanced.

>In fact several people *did* try to get 3.13 running on GCC 3, but no one
>came near to succeeding, which did not surprise us, since it was a huge
>amount of work, and indeed the work is still not complete.

Of course. Still ... I did not cross a problem in the last few days.