[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?)
From: |
Doran Moppert |
Subject: |
Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?) |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:04:20 +1000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 05:33:49PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 12:20:28AM +1000, Doran Moppert wrote:
> > process the better!! I don't mind if my compiler uses heuristics to optimise
>
> Yeah, like those never go wrong.
very true. But at least if implemented correctly, an optimiser should never
change the specified behaviour of a program. Ideally.
A non-deterministic merge scares the hell out of me though.
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Miles Bader, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Robert Collins, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Robert Collins, 2003/09/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?, Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/20
- merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?), Doran Moppert, 2003/09/20
- Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?), Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/20
- Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?),
Doran Moppert <=
- Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?), Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/20
- Re: merge algorithms (Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: -L option for tag?), Robert Collins, 2003/09/20