This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: autoconf for type sizes
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at Stanford dot EDU>
- Subject: Re: autoconf for type sizes
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 19:06:26 +0000 (GMT)
- cc: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> *shrug* I think it would involve less Makefile contortions if we
> don't generate it on the fly, particularly since we already have
> machinery to do float.h that way.
I can always write a generator program to work in this way. We would need
to work out how to handle targets where the type sizes vary depending on
compiler options: do we create a special limits.h for each one, or do we
arrange for different limits.h files (ILP32, LP64, etc.) to be selected by
the compiler depending on -m options passed (as with multilibs - AFAIK the
compiler will DTRT with multilib include directories, once they've been
installed).
> Larger policy question: should we add -std= switches for the bigger
> standards that incorporate ISO C? (POSIX.n, SVIDn, XPG, etc - look at
> glibc's <features.h>) I'd vote yes but only after we get a new driver.
Some targets already have undocumented -posix, -pthread, etc. options.
These should be unified in some consistent scheme. We need to define how
such options relate to other -std settings, __STRICT_ANSI__, -pedantic,
builtins, etc.. For example, would -std=posix96 imply -std=c89
(__STRICT_ANSI__ with a suitable value of _POSIX_C_SOURCE) but
-std=posix01 (or -std=austin for now) imply -std=c99 (__STRICT_ANSI__,
__STDC_VERSION__=199901L and appropriate feature test macro)?
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk