[gentoo-dev] Re: Dying on some CFLAGS instead of filtering them.

[Ryan Hill]

Paul de Vrieze wrote:

> My argument is that we must not filter -ffast-math or any other dangerous
> cflags. The reason being that people will request more filters for all
> packages that don't work with it. Many users will either ignore or miss the
> warning messages. Filtering the flag basically tells them that even though
> the message says it is dangerous, their use of the flag is still more or less
> supported, while it is not.

Okay, I agree with this if it's considered acceptable to die during pkg_setup.
I was under the impression it's not.

>> Right, but how are people supposed to learn something is dangerous if all
>> the sharp edges have been filed off?  And how can you decide which flags
>> are "bad" and "good" on a global level when for the most part compiler
>> parameters are akin to black magic?
>
> In this case the compiler documentation itself says it is dangerous. That
> should be enough.

Agreed.  Anything but global filtering.

--de.