On 9/10/2012 9:35 AM, Bruce Korb wrote:
On 09/09/12 08:54, rbmj wrote:
Just because I *love* bothering everyone with emails...
I don't mind, as long as you don't expect me to do anything
until I'm certain you've stabilized the patch ;)
I'm glad you rolled it up into one patch, because I was
eventually going to ask you to do that. Thank you.
I keep thinking everything is stable, but then something changes
(bitrot? something elsewhere in GCC? I don't know) and I have to
regroup. Sorry for changing everything 10 times - please bear with me.
At this point, I've recompiled with different settings about 10 times
and it hasn't broken itself yet. I've tried in a different VM and it
works there too. So *hopefully* it should be good.
On the other hand, I've read this on the website:
Don't mix together changes made for different reasons. Send them individually. Ideally, each change you send should be impossible to subdivide into
parts that we might want to consider separately, because each of its
parts gets its motivation from the other parts
"impossible to subdivide into parts" seems like one patch per
fixincludes rule (am I looking at the wrong level of granularity here?).
At the same time, it's a pain in the rear to worry about 12 different
commits (especially when I'm making changes, I git rebase a TON). I'm
also not sure about practicality of this approach in terms of the amount
of work it creates on all ends.
Unless cosmic rays break everything again, that should be all.
Thanks,
Robert Mason
