From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24369 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2003 19:18:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24362 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2003 19:18:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2003 19:18:11 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A7B2B89; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:18:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F7C79F2.9080702@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 19:18:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker , Stan Shebs Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Features vs infrastructure (was Re: Tracepoint support in Cygnus GDB ?) References: <3F76EC92.6010005@redhat.com> <4098-Sun28Sep2003234119+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <3F775F6C.8070209@redhat.com> <3F784618.50203@redhat.com> <3F7B4BEC.1060800@apple.com> <3F7B9B85.50201@redhat.com> <3F7B9FEF.6070600@apple.com> <3F7BB81C.6090403@redhat.com> <3F7BC8C6.7010601@apple.com> <20031002070241.GX933@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00062.txt.bz2 > That's an interesting question. Thinking about that, and comparing with >> GCC experience, I'd say that in general it's just extremely difficult to >> get infrastructural work accomplished in a small group or small company; >> you'd have to have a sufficiently large and/or well-funded group that >> the time taken by infrastructure does not affect the group's overall >> schedule. That argument only serves as an excuse for poor engineering. > Unfortunately, my own experience with large companies is that they have > very very very controlled budgets and that it's hard to explain to a > manager who only cares about functionality that such and such > infrastructure work is going to save some bucks later if the rework is > going to take more than, say, a few days. > > In my opinion, unless you find a talented developper willing to invest > a lot of his own time, the right way to go is incremental improvements > via transition plans. Yes. Andrew