------- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-08 10:44 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
>
> Sorry, you got it totally wrong! When someone suggests a feature that he
> thinks
> would be useful, he does definitely not imply that the current developers are
> bored and have nothing to do.
If after being repetitively told that the developers don't see a feature
request as appropriate or useful or even practical such someone keeps insisting
and arguing giving the impression that such person is offended because his/her
feature doesn't get any attention, then, at least in my case, my conclusion is
that such person thinks that the developers should go out of their way to
precisely define and implement the feature in his/her behalf. Sorry, if that is
not the case here.
> The critical misunderstanding here is that some GCC developers think that a
> feature request is something that they are obliged to implement within a
> certain time and the only way to get rid of that obligation is to dismiss any
> idea, that they do not have time to implement right now, as invalid.
That is obviously not the case. There are many interesting feature requests
open in bugzilla that most GCC developers would like to see implemented but
nobody has had time to implement right now.
On the other hand, as far as I understand it, features marked as invalid won't
be implemented ever. Not even if the developers had time to implement them. The
reasons maybe several: not useful, not appropriate for the scope of the
project, not possible. We just want to keep our bugzilla as clean and useful as
possible while not giving false hopes to users.
Some of us have argued above that this PR doesn't meet some of the above
criteria. Anyway, this discussion is pointless. This PR won't be closed as
INVALID. If you are happier if we keep open this feature request, so be it.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|manu at gcc dot gnu dot org |
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31983
