| 1 |
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:14:46PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote: |
| 2 |
> * Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> schrieb: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> <snip> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Non gcc compilers have never been supported and probably never will be. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> If someone decides to work on that topic, IMHO the best approach |
| 9 |
> would be providing an gcc-style frontend, so we actually get |
| 10 |
> an drop-in-replacement (at least from the command line view). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
What would it do if a gcc-specific option is used for which the real |
| 13 |
compiler does not provide any option, even with a different name? If |
| 14 |
it would ignore it, things would break horribly (just think of |
| 15 |
-funsigned-char). If it would error out, are any options other than |
| 16 |
those already specified by POSIX (`man 1p c99`) available on all |
| 17 |
systems? (If not, no gcc-style frontend is necessary, because the |
| 18 |
options are already the same for all compilers intended to be |
| 19 |
usable as a (Unix-like-)system compiler.) |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives